Skip to main content

Full text of "Journal of Egyptian archaeology vol.30"

See other formats





! ACCESSION NO,_ ^J)_51i5 
CALL No. 913.320^ jj’.E.A . _| 

D.G*A 79'4! 





'r* ■ 

. :i 











Price m nojHtticmbeft 5^- tiojw 



The Egjpt Exploration Society 

(so styled since 1919) was founded in 1882, and incorporated in 1888 as the "Egypt 
Expionitioo Fund*, 

Ever since its foundation it has made survcv^ and conducted explorations ^d 
excavations in Eg^^pt, in accordance with the best methods of scientific investigation^ 
for the purpose of obtaining information about the andent history, religion, arts, 
literature, and ethnology of that countiy. The Sodety*s activities have recently been 
extended to the exploration of sites of die Pharaonic Period in the Sudan. 

Those of the antiquities discovered which are not retmned, according to law, by 
the Antiquities Departments of Egypt and the Sudan are exliibitcd in London every 
year and are then distributed among public museums in the United Kingdom, the 
British Dominions, the LTnited States of America, and elsewhere, in strict proportion 
to the contributions from each locality, 

All persons interested in the promotion of the Society's objects are eligible for 
election as Members, The entrance fee hitherto payable has been suspended until 
further notice. The annual subscription is 2s. to the London Office, or Sr0.00 to 
the American Office (see below), due on ist January. 

Members have the right of attendance and ^-oting at all meetinp, and may intro¬ 
duce friends to the Ijectures and Exhibitions of the Society. They have access to the 
Library at the Society’s Rooms in T^aindoa, and may borroiiV books. 

The JoustNAL OF Egyptian Archaeology or, altematiydy, a Graeco-Roman 
Memoir, is presented gratis to all Members, and other publications may be purchased 
by them at a substantial discount. 

Subject to certain conditions, of which details may be had on application, all 
students between the ages of fifteen and twenty-five are eligible for election as .Asso¬ 
ciate Members. Associate Members receive the Jouilnal, gratis and post Tree, and 
enjoy ah other prii-ileges of membership except the right to vote at meetings. The 
annual subscription for Associate Members is loj. 6d. to the London Office, or $2.50 
to the American Office. 

Persons may also join the Society ^ Associates at an annual subscription of yr. 6d. 
to the London Office. Associates are entitled to receive the i\nnual Report and tickets 
for lectures and exhibitions, and to use the Library in London, but not to take out 

a Full particulars may be obtained from the Secretary, z Hinde Street, Manchester 
Square, London, W. 1, or from the Secretary of the American Branch, A. S. Arnold, 
Esq., P.O. Box 71, Meiuchen, New Jersey, U.S.A. 

Communications to the Journal of Egyptian Archaeology should be sent to 
the Editor, Dr. Alan H. Gabhiner. Upton House, Wonston, nr. Winchester. All 
books for review should be sent to the Secretary of the Egypt Exploration 
Society, z Hinde Street, Manchester Square, London, W. i . 

All subscriptions for the Joltinal of Egyptian Arcbaeouxjy should be sent to 
the HoNOfLARY Treasciier of the Egypt Exploration SociErY, 2 Hinde Street, 
Manchester Square, London. W. i, or P.O. Box 71, Metuchen, New Jersey, U.S.A, 

- I- 

« ^ i 


I ^ Ml 



V'VV'VMVVJ- i ^ wIMMMMMMMM ,., ^ .p^yyvv^ 

Plate I 





Egyptian Archaeology 



913 - 33,05 










.*NTR-AL A' 



m-* - 


^ ZEmlh *»*^**"**^' _ ^ #\ 



Editorial Foreword ... . 


» 1 

■I 1 * 

«-■■■■ ■‘i-i- *** 

1 « 1 



A Relief from the To^ts of Harembag 

1 f >1 

* - W V.. 

John D- Cooney 



The Myth of Hords at Edfu— II (ctmchided) 


*-■ ... 

A. M. Blackman 
H. Wb Fairman 



Horus THE Beijdetite 

* ■ S ¥ ¥ ¥ 

Alan Hb Gardiner 



The Rereu.ion in the Hare Nome 


... ■ ■ 1 . 

R. 0* Faulkner 



A Scene of worshipping Sacred Cows ... 


* . * V B ■ 

Nina M, Davies 


Walter Ewing Crum 



H. FBdl 


Sir Herbert Thompson .. 



S. K. Glanville 

•r p 1 


A Reply to H. I. Bell: P. Giss. 40 and 
Antonirdantt ... ... ... ... 


1- I- I- 


mAA i ■ ■ 

A. Segrt 

ii -h * 


Reply to the Forecoinq ... 

•I ■ fr 

■■ ■ » 

fe« 1 

H. L Bell 



Brief Commumcations; A Motlier-of-peafi Shell Disk of Sen-wosTct III, ^ A. J, Arkell, p. 74; 
A Suggestion regarding die Construction of the Pyramids, J. E. G. Harris, p, 74; The Ele¬ 
phant's Trunk called its drt (dri) *Hatid\.<^ P. E. Neftvbcrty, p. 75; The Tormido' employed in 
Hunting by the Egyptians of the Middle Kingdom, P* E. Newberry, p. 75: Ineditum Cam- 
pioneum Nottmghamense, by F, M. Heichelhdm, p. 76; The Date of the Accession to the 
Throne of Diocletian, by A. Segrfc, p, 77. 

Notices OF Recent Pubucations; 

E. M, EIUSSELMAN, A. E. Jc BOAK and w, F. EOCERTON, Papyri from Tebiynis, 11 {Michigan 

Papyri, W). Reviewed by F* M. Heichelheim ... ... .. 78 

OTHER RECENT BOOKS . . ... ... . -g 

Additions and Corrections to A. M. Blackman and H. W. Fairman, ‘The Alyih of Homs at 
Edfu—II', in KXEt-KJis ... .. ... ... ... .. 70 


PJate I 

Plate II 
Plate Ill 

Plate IV 
PJate V 

Plate VI 

Plate Vll 
Plate VIII 

Detail of a Relief from the Tomb of fjareinhab now in the BrooI^Jyn Museum 


Detail from the Tomb of Haremhab now in the Brooklyn Museum , facing p* 2 

Horus the Bchdetite: i , 2. Reliefs from the sides of the thrones in sitting statues 
of Sesostris I from Lisht; 3, 4. Reliefs of the reign of King Djoser (Third 

Dynasty) from the Step Pyramid at 9aHarah - - . facing p. zb 

Horus the Behdedte: Doorway of Sesostris I from the temple of Medamild. facit^ p, 27 

Horus the Bchdetite: i. Circular nome^ltst from a late sarcophagus now in the 
Metropolitan IMuscum of Art, New' York: 2. Sketch-map of the Delta to show 
the position of towns mentioned in the article . . . facing p, 36 

Horus the Behdetite: i. Winged Disk and titulary of King SahurE< at top of the 
sail of his ship: relief from his pyramid-temple at Sakkarah: 2. Winged Disk 
and royal name from a stela of Ammenemes III at Serabif el-Khadtm (Sinai); 

3. Winged Disk from above a scene in the temple of Hashepsowe at DCr 
el-Bahri: 4. Comb of the rngn of King Djet (First Dynasty) from Abydus; 

5. Names of King Bahure' from a column in his pyramid-temple; 6. Homs- 
natne of King Amenophis !I from an obelisk in the Cairo Museum facing p. 37 

Scene from the Tomb of Nesptrefrhor at Thebes (No, 6S) . , facing p. 64 

Sir Herbert Thompson facmg,p. 67 


Chving to the serious curtailment of space It is not proposed to 
continue the annual Indexes that were customary until VoL XXVlL 
For these there may be substituted a quinquennial or decennial 
Index, which would, indeed, be of far greater utility. 



Again this year the losses of our Society by death have been very hea\'y, though we 
have the consolation that the cutting short of no young lives has to be recorded. On 
the other hand, the passing of such well-beloved personalities as Dr, W, E- Crum, Sir 
Herbert Thompson, and Sir Henry Lyons could not be other than a cruel blow. Of 
these the youngest was Crum at the age of nearly seventy-nine; all had long careers of 
brilliant achievement behind them, and have left great heritages of permanent gain. 
Sir Henry Lyons, F.R.S,, our most recent loss, was no Egyptologist in the literal sense, 
but as a scientifically highly gifted administrator, former Director of the Egyptian 
Survey Department, and author of books on Fhilae and on the Nile, as well as of articles 
in Journal, made important indirect contributions to our more special held; for 
a long time he acted as Chairman of our Committee, and often presided at our lectures; 
his death on August lo, 1Q44, occurred too late for inclusion of a memoir in this volume, 
but the Editor cannot refrain from here giving voice to his own grateful recollection 
of much encouragement given in former years. Similar debts are owing from himself 
among many to the two others whose departure we mourn, both of them very- eminent 
scholars. The name of Crum was almost synonymous tvith Coptic studies, a domain in 
which he stood forth pre-eminent, though Thompson also could here lay claim to an 
honourable place. It was, however, mainly as a demotist that Thompson excelled; in 
this line he was second in our country only to Griffith. Tributes to the memories of 
Crum and Thompson w'ill be found farther on in these pages. 

As the War nears its end, our thoughts cannot fail to be preoccupied w'ith the future 
of our studies. Will it prove possible to resume these in much the same manner as 
before, or will such intellectual endeavours go to the wall in face of economic stress? 
Fortunately there are signs favouring the more optimistic view. The Conference on the 
Future of Archaeology, held m London in August 1943, revealed much enthusiasm for 
that subject, and reports from Egypt tell of a like'interest among the officers there. 
How the finances of our Society will stand is very uncertain, but as regards facilities for 
training young Egyptologists we are far better placed than could have been anticipated 
a decade ago. The Griffith Institute at Oxford is equipped with a library of almost 
unrivalled excellence, and London and Liverpool likewise present good opportunities. 
The Budge Fellowships at our two chief Universities ought to be of great help. And 
now, just in time for mention here, comes the news of Sir Herbert Thompson’s great 
benefaction to Cambridge 'with the wish that it be applied for the study of Egyptology'’. 
May the coming generation prove itself worthy of such enlightened forethought! 

The veil screening France from our sight has at last been lifted, and readers will 
rejoice that all news of our colleagues there is satisfactory'. Nor have we heard of loss 
from the Louvre, though in this matter details must be awaited. 





The relief illustrated in pk. i, ii is a fragment from the famous tomb of Haremhab at 
Memphis, purchased in 1932 by the Trustees of the Brooklyn Museum for the EgJT*" 
ian collection. Previously published,' the relief has remained comparatively unknown. 
A brief republication in a j'oumal of wuder distribution seems, accordingly, to be 
warranted, not only because the relief is a fine example of New Kingdom art, but also 
because it bears an inscription which seems to date the tomb. 

At the time of purchase no information was acquired concerning the recent history 
of the relief. It appears to have been for some time in a private collection in France, 
to w'hich country it was probably taken when the reliefs from the tomb w'ere dispersed 
in the nineteenth century. Some years ago Professor Jean Capart of Brussels, Belgium, 
remarked to me that the Brooklyn fragment was certainly to be connected with a very 
similar piece in the Louvre,^ which shows another part of the same scene; and I agree 
with his identification. While in the previous publication no basis was given for the 
identification of the Brooklyn relief, 1 think there can be no doubt of its connexion 
with ^aremhab's tomb, in view of the subject, the style, and the relationship to the 
Louvre fragment. 

The subject-matter, Haremhab receiving royal awards in the presence of his troops, 
is conventional, but the splendid workmanship and the individual treatment of each 
face, verging on portraiture, make this relief an outstanding example of late Eighteenth 
Dynastj' art. As the illustration is complete and clear there is no necessity to describe 
the piece in detail; a few remarks will suffice to complete the description. 

The relief, of very white, hard limestone, measures 0-418 X 0-366 m. All the bodies 
retain, to some extent, extensive areas of light orange-red paint. The wigs, now black, 
W'ere probably originally blue, but the staves, so far as 1 recall, retain no trace of paint. 
In the upper right corner of the relief is the upraised and extended right arm of a figure 
now lost. This, to judge by the position of the arm, was certainly Haremhab himself, 
receiving his golden awards. Over the heads are preserved very slight traces of the 
upper register, suggesting an architectural subject, probably a portion of the palace, 
from the balcony of w'hich the King w'as rewarding his general. The Louvre fragment, 
a continuation of the group of soldiers, is to be replaced at the left end of the Brooklyn 
relief. To the right and abov’e was the King on his balcony. As these notes are written 
far from access to books and records, I cannot determine w'hethcr the two pieces connect 
with any other known fragments. 

^ E. L. M. T(iggcrt), A Note on the H^remk^ tn xix (No, 4, October 

147“5*> witb iUuatrataon 00 cover* Also iUustrmtcd without comiticnt in Antmai Repi^rt 0/ fAe BrooMyn 
Instilutef 1 ^ 35 . 

* J, Caipflit, Doaimmii pour ttrvrr h P^tude dt farf igyptitn^ it| pi 61. 

Plate II 




The inscription is of great interest; and a complete translation of it can now be 
given to replace the tentative reading which appeared in the first publication, ft 
consists of two short lines, poorly cut and retaining no trace of paint. These lines 
readr (i) (2) Py sry/(n) » Mn-Ay 

'Standard-bearer of the regiment “Love of the Aten*' Minkhaej *. The third sign of line 
one is almost completely effaced, but the diagonal stroke leaves no dotibt that it was 
the red crown. I was unable to fit this letter into my translation until Gardiner ver>' 
kindly verified my reading, explaining it as a mistake of the scribe. He also verified 
the reading of the strangely divided group as mrtt'f, a point that had puzzled me. 
The inscription identifies the elegant soldier in the threefold wig directly under the 
inscription as Minkliacy, a variant of a well-known name.* But the important part ol 
the inscription is the mention of the Aten, and that in the name of a military corps. So 
far as I recollect no other portion of Haremhab’s tomb contains a reference to the .Aten. 

While there has never been any doubt of the general period of the tomb, its exact 
dating has been a matter of much speculation, the most generally accepted date being 
that given by Winlock,^ who suggests the reign of Tuuankhamun, The inscription on 
the Brooklyn piece seems to point, ho«'ever, to a slightly earlier date. 

The terminal dates for the use of Aten in the name of a military unit are from the 
last years of the reign of Amenophls III to the reigns of Akhenaten’s immediate succes¬ 
sors. Since the 'Amamah heresy showed signs of disintegration even previous to 
Akhenaten’s death, it is improbable that a military unit would have received, after that 
monarch's death, a name connected with a vraning cause. The swle of the relief, as 
shown below, precludes a date previous to the founding of 'Amamah, and the very 
name, 'Love of the Aten’, has the sentimental tone which permeates the whole 'Amamah 
movement. This reference to the Aten was so obscure that it escaped obsen'ation when 
Harcmhab returned to the orthodox party. Combined with the analysis of style, the 
inscription seems to me to indicate the reign of Akhenaten as the most probable date of 
the tomb, or at least of that portion from which this relief comes. Unless other evidence 
comes to light, accordingly, the date of the tomb must be shifted back to the reign of 
Akhenaten, probably w'^ell into his reign; for the style of the Brooklyn relief show's 
'Amamah art in its mature stage, minus any of the early exaggerations. 

Every detail of the style points to an 'Amamah date. The exaggeratedly elegant and 
elongated hands are commonplace details of the period, found even later, but the 
composition of the hands of the right end group betrays the 'Amamah style. Here the 
han<^ break over into the upper register in an arrangement leading up gradually to the 
highest hand of all, the central figure of Haremhab, This was a device used at 'Amamah 
to concentrate attention on the central figure, one of the innovations of the period. 
The timid efforts to unite separate registers by means of overlapping details are also 
typical of the 'Amamah school. The soldiers are divided into groups with a space 
Iwtween each group, while the groups themselv^ are again divided into pairs of two 

* H* Ranine. Persettennamen, p, 264, fio- 8. 

^ H. E. Winiocfcj A Status of htfare hit Atam&Ti, in JEA, x, l-g- S« aIm tbt author's 

iiarmkabt commander-in-Mff of ArTrun of Ttiienkfutrnffi, in xvitt (1923)' P*- 


soldiers each. This technique replaced the older, conventional massing of groups for 
the brief span of the 'Amamah age. Whether we have portraiture in the faces is 
debatable, but certainly we have a series of individuals each of whom stands out as a 
marked physical type. Individuality of so pronounced a type can best be explained by 
an *Amamah date. Particularly striking evidence of the 'Araamah school is found in 
the division of the interest of this small group of soldiers. The second and third pairs 
from the right gaie upward at the King, the others at Haremhab. The introduction of 
psychological unity in reliefs is an 'Amamah contribution and has been very fully 
commented on by Frankfort,* The absence of the exa^erattons typical of early 
'Amamah work precludes a date early in the reign of Akhenaten. The faces show no 
trace of the conventionalized individuality or of the ugliness so prevalent in early 
'Amamah work, nor of the distorted bodies that were one of the most noticeable and 
unfortunate innovations of 'Amamah. Only the soldier at the extreme right shows any 
trace of sagging abdominal muscles, and be is portrayed as an elderly, bald-headed 
man. It is strange to find so masterly an example of the 'Amamah school at distant 
Memphis. Possibly Akhenaten donated the ser\'ices of sculptors from the royal work¬ 
shops at 'Amamah, 

As Win lock has remarked in the article referred to above, the influence of 'Amamah 
did not disappear overnight. Mere traces of it in the Haremhab reliefs w'ould, accord- 
ingly, be uncertain evidence of the exact date of the tomb. The attributes of the 
developed 'Amamah style are, however, so dominant in the Brooklyn relief that on 
stylistic grounds alone I cannot see any alternative to a date for this tomb In the latter 
part of the reign of Akhenaten, Combined with the evidence of the inscription, 1 think 
an 'Amamah date reasonably certain for Haremhab's tomb. 

* The Miffal Famiifig of n-Amanwh, p. 

Postscript. Almost two years after writing the above paper I have found a recent publicatioD of 
the Brooklyn relief: J* Vandier, Deux fragmenis de h iombe Afempkite d'Horeniheb conserr^s au 
Mu$^e du Lotivre^ in Syriem offerU i M. R. Du^mud, Paris^ t939p w. pp* 

with pi. L Although dated 1939^ volume was not issued until laterp since when international 
condiriona have precluded distribution. Vandier interprets the subject of the Lou^Te-Brooklyn relief 
as a symbolical homage to Haremhabp but the photograph furnished him of the Brooklyn relief is 
so very poor that it does not reveal the king's arm on which the identification of the scene re$ts, 
nor does it permit a reading of the inscription. Now that I have available a photograph of the 
Louvre relief^ the only remark I can add is that the figures in the Brtwkljnn portion represent the 
officers of the regiment mentioned in the inscription, and those in the Louvre portion the men 
too. The inscription seems to me to contradict \"andier's late dating of the tomb (post-Akhenaten). 

( 5 ) 





Scene I 


Published: Naville, op. dt., pL v«: E, vi, 78-Si; xui, pU. Dvn-DvuL 

Description of the Relief. A large ship, its sail distended with the wind. In the 
middle of the vessel stands Horus of Behdet, great god, lord of Mesen, who with his 
right hand thrusts his harpoon into the snout of a hippopotamus. In his left hand he 
holds the ends of two ropes which are doubtless attached to the blades already lodged 
in the animal's body/ Isis squatting in the bow holds two similar ropes. On shore, 
facing the ship, is the King — ^wearing the head-dress of Onuris'* — who harpoons the 
hippopotamus in the back of the head. Behind the King are two running men, each 
caiT}’ing a harpoon and a dagger. 

Dramatis Personae Relief 

Homs of Eel>dei, lord of Mesen 

The King 

The royal children and crew of Homs,’ 
the Harpooners of Horns, lord of 
Mesen, andofHomsofBchdet (repre¬ 
sented by the two running men) 

Dramatic Tbct 



The Young HarpooncTs"^ 



Subsidiary Texts. A. Above Horus of Behdet, lord of Mesen: [8i, 8] Utterance by 
Horus of BsAief, great god^ lord of the skyy lord of MeseUy teko koldeth fast, pilot in his 
war-galley t who htrleth his thirty-barbed harpoon at the snout of the HippapotamuSy while 
his motherprotecteth him* 

B. Above Isis: [81, 7) Isis the great, the god^s mother. 

C. Above the King: [78, it] The King of Upper and Lower Egypt, {Bianftji, Son of 

» See JEA najt. 5, n. f. ••See Junker, Om ^ tsendt . 2 ff. « Addressed by Isi*. E . VI. 80,11. 

■• Accordina to Wb . V, zoi, Rf-dKO perhaps onsinnlly meani a ^watch on board ship' (Bord^cAe), so, aa 
Gardiner obeerves, the employmetlt of the expression m gi-dp here it particularly apt. since Isk is On board 
ifl the prow. 


Rer^ {Pioiemaeus~may‘ke-Iw€-for-ever^BeIoved-of-Ptah% the karpooner of upright car- 
riage* tmlding] ike three-horbed harpoon 

D, Above the two running menr [79, i] The ri^al children and creto of Horus, the 

Harpooners of the lord of Mesen, the valorous Harpooners of Horus of Bekdet^ who thrust 
to make an end of his enemies^ adepts at holding fast, stalwart hero{€s)^ whose weapons 
reach {the mark), who pierce^ the deep water, whose shafts flash behind the robber-beasts, 
whose blades seize on their flesh, whose amts are strong wfien dragging the foes, and tltey 
reach Mesen greatly, 

E. In a single horizontal line above the relief: [79, 5] Come, let us hasten to the Pool of 
Horus,^^ that we may see the Falcon in his ship, that we may see tfte son of Isis in his 
war-galley, tike Rif in the Bark of the Morning.^ His harpoon is held firmly in his grip, 
as {in that of) Horus of the Mighty Arm,'' He casteth and draggeth,^ that [/«] may bring 
captive the Hippopotamus and slay the Lower-Egyptian Bull. R^oice, ye inhabitants of 
Retrihution-Town! Alack, alack, in Kenmei!‘ 

DR,\mTic Text, (a) [chorus.] [79, 8] Seize thy dnut,^^ come down and stand fast, 
{having*/ thine adornments which belong to Hedihotpef^ thy net which belongeth to Mtn, 
which zcas woven for thee and spun for thee by Hatkor, mistress of the \h-plant.^^ A meal 
of forelegs is assigned thee, and thou eatesi it eagerly {?). The gods of the sky are in terror 
[79, 10] tjT Horus.'^ Hear ye the cries ofNehes! Steady, Horus I Flee not because of them 
that are in the water, fear not them that are in the stream. Hearken not when he {Seth) 
pleadeth vnth thee. 

(b) [chorus and onlookers.] Holdfast, Horus, holdfast! 

(c) [ISIS.] Take to (lit. 'smze') thy war-galley, my son Horus whom 1 love, the nurse^ 
which dandleth Horus upon the water, hiding him beneath her iindters, the deep gloom of 
pines. There is no fear when [80, 1] backing^ (?) to moor, for the goodly rudder tumeth 
upon its posP like Horus on the tap of his mother Isis. The h^vw are fixed upon the imsty/ 
like the vizier in the palace. The mast siandeth firmly on the footstep, like Horus when he 
became ruler over this land. That beauteous sail of dazzling brightness is tike Nut the great 

* S^JEA xxtx, 4, n. where it suggested that ^of erect bearifig' might be a better refldering, 

^ For this meaning of see Wb. v, i tp and for ihai of Wh, v, 25^ 10. 11. * See Wb. l^Op 15, 

^ See JunkeFp Chturislpgfndrj 19 f. Here again HomSp the youthfii] son of Isis, is differentiated frotn the old 
war-god of Edfd, imt-f'. In the next sentence after p kfb restore 

Le,, having hurled his harpoons he pulls at the roptes attached to the blades, which arc stuck fast in the 
bewly of the hippopotarnusH in order to drag it in and give it the cowjs de grdc^; JEA xxix, 5p n. f. 
f See Commentary, n. 26. 

s We would emend <^) i}krw-k and we take the J preceding ffd^hip to be a ™tmgof the gcncti^^ n parallel 
to the o before Min, For the 'net of Mtn* see E. vip 64, 4, 

^ These words and the following exhortations occur again in vi^ 81, 1-3, For see Commentaryp 

n, 9. ^ Cf. E- VI, 76, 9-10; viit 153. 9; and xxix* iS^ with n, b, 

j must be the infinitive (after the prepcNsition m) of the verb rki, which regularly denotes hostility 

and opposition. We suggestp therefore^ that as some manoeuvre connected with the rudder (or rather steering- 
oar) seems to be indicated here, r^{i) means to 'back astern', with a view to brtnging the ship into a suitable 
position for mooringr 

The suffix 'f show's that a writing of IF6, ui, *2- Glanvilk, ZAS lyp n, 81, 

and J 4 quier, Bull. Inst, /r., tx, 47p have mistaken the meaning of 

I J * ^identified l $ee also Glan\^ 3 le, ZAS 16 f, n, 31; 24^ n. 64; j^quier, 

op, rit*, IS, €3, (ai)« For 'footstep* sec Wb. 205, t* 


(wrt) tEheti she ttias pregnant tcilh the gods. The ttco lifts* one is Isis, the other Nephthys, 
each of them firmly holding^ what uppertainetb to them upon the yard-aTtml" tike brothers 
by one mother mated in wedlock:^ [fe, 5] The roeolocks^ are fixed upon the gunwale like the 
ornaments of princes. The oars beat on either side of her (i.e. the ship) like heralds^ when tfiey 
proclaim the joust.* The planks adhere closely together and are not parted the one from the 
other. The dect^ is like a writing-board filled with the images^ of goddesses. The baulks in the 
hoW are like pillars standing firmly in a temple. The belaying-pins (?) in the bulwarks'^ (?) 
are like a noble snake whose back is concealed. The scoops of real lapis lazuli (hsdb) baleth 
out the water as fine unguent I* while the 'lyh-weed” scurries° m front of her like a great snake 
[80, lo] into its hole.^ The hawser^ is beside the post'^ like a chick beside its mother. 

(d) [chorus and onlookers*] Holdfast^ Hotus, hold fasti 

(e) [readeh.] Isis said to the Young Harpooners when she saw their shapely hands *■ 

(f) [ISIS.] Assault ye the foe, slay ye [8i, 1] him in his lair, slaughter ye him in his 
\fdestined) moment*] here and now! Plunge your knives into [him] again and againP 

The godls of the sky me in terror of Horus.'* Hear ye the cry of NSkes. [Steady, Horusl] 
Flee not because of them that are in the water, fear not them that are in the stream. Hearken 
not when he (Seth) pleadeth with thee... holden (?) in thy grasp, my son Horus. 

*■ Suchp we 9ugg»t, b the liicflning ; See also J^qtiicru. op. Cit-^ 74^ {37)p who, how'ev-erp in op, 

iXj 7t( (33). iriierprets the words quite differently. ^ For fwA jn see iVh. 11, 119. 

c Sm K'ft, iVp j24f 14: Psmarft 58 ™ Gardiner, JE/J ix, q, with n, 6, 

^ The w^ords ^ j>f m itmwf mean lit, "hs>ing intercour^ with women** With Iri m cf. the Arabic j 

« The objects described are e^identlyr in of their position, leather loops through w^hich the handte^ of 
the oars w'cre passed and which, therefore, ser^'ed m rowiocks- For *^gunwale* see iv^ 43^ 

f For iirnm (?) see Wb. v, ^Sp 4, 

t Or matr accurately, perhapSp 'prize-fight* or ^game of single-sticks', Sethe, Drairt. T^xit^ p, |66> CF also 
the determinative of hnmey, Pyr, | iSqr. 

CF Glanville, ZAS ucvill, iZp n. 17^ and for f'n n jJ see TTTj. 1, 187, 13. 

* This word is to be read rptcryf, iVh. 11, 415, tt* 

i For tPTa^f "hold' = Copt, see H'jfr. 1, 316^ r; P. Chater Beaity^ *Vo. ///p 9, 7. Gardiner^ Httr&U Pap. 
rrt /Ae Brit. Muir, Third Sfries, U tS, not quite accurately translates the w^ord 'hull'* 

^ Such, wc venture to suggest^ are the meanlnga of iwbytv and myv?. The comparison between a belaying- 
pin in its socket and a snake in its hole is by no means Inapt. 

^ For the word ^ V' J^quicr, op. cit., I3f, 63, fzS), 

Reading tpt n kn^ for which see fFA. 49, 15. 

probably a writing of ^^ f, 39p 1. The word ia written 1 ^ J , E. ip yz^ 9^ Vii, 259, i, 
For actu:d representations of tong trailing w-ater-plants in front of a boat sec e^g., DavieSp Dfir el Gehr^wi, 1, 
pL v; Blackman p AfrtVp ui, pL iv. The word Seems to have been quite misunderstood by J6quier, op. dt,, 
IXp 77. (45)- 

“ Or perhaps "dashes' or 'is dashed^ i.e., it is pushed forward violently by the ship as she advances rapidly 
over the water. Cf. the ^-arious meaninES sssigned to the simplex IF6. v, 297. 

p \Vc propose the ementlation 

q Sec IVb. IV, 528, 6, The determinative is wrongly given as ^ byJ^quier,op. dt.i ix^yy, (47), and the word 
translated "maiUef . 

See TFA. lip 207» t7- *Tht word is incorrectly read by J^uJer, op. cit,, ix, 77, {46)^ his « 

being actually .= = gr I 

* Restoring m — m Tp lit. *«t one time^ 

* Lit. "multiply {sfif tn) j-our knives in him'. Or ate w^e to read tdfm tn tm-/, "slash at him with 

your knives^j lit. ^makc your knives cleave to him*? For sdad see IFA. iVp 370+ iz. <= &cc p. 6, n. h. 


Lay hold, Horus, lay bold on the karpom-shafu yea /, am the lady of the shafU I 
am ike beautiful one, the mistress of the loud screamer,*^ lehich cometh forth upon the banks 
and [Si, 5] gkametb after the rol^er-beasi,^ which rippeth opeti hts skin, breaketk open (sj) 
his ribs and enteretiu . .. I forget [not] the night of the food, the hour of turmoil (pr b). 
(g) [chorus and onuookers,] Hold fast, Horus, holdfast! 

Scene II 



Published: Naville« op. cit., pi. viii; E, vi, 82-4; siiij pis. Dix-ox, 

Description of the Relief, Homs of Behdott lord of Mesen, standing at the water’s 
edge, pierces the head of a hippopotamus with his harpoon. To the left of this figure 
is a boat in w^hich Horus of Behdet again appears, crowned, as usual, with the double 
crown and also holding the crook and whip. Behind him is Thoth, his right hand 
uplifted in the gesture of protection or blessing, and his left hand holding a papyrus roll 
and the ’^-symbol. On shore, facing the boat, is the Queen, jingling a p air of sistra. In 
her train are six women, in two rows of tbee, beating single-membrane dmms. Those 
in the tower row represent the Lower-Egyptian princesses and the women of Buslris, 
those in the upper row the Upper-Egyptian princesses and the women of Pe and Dep. 

Dramatis Personae Relief 

Horus of Behdet, lord of Mesen 


The Queen 

The Upper- and Lower-Egyptian 
princesses and the women of Bu¬ 
sins, Pe, and Dep 

Dramatic Test 
H orus 

The Queen 

The women of Buriris, Pe, 
and Dep 


SUBSIDLARY Tekts. A, I. Above Horus of Betidet, lord of Mesen: [84, 6] Utterance 
by Horus of Behdet, great god, lord of the sky, lord of Mesen; Wenty^ who pierceih the 
Unsuccessful One, his foe; (even) Him mth the Upraised Arm, who wieldeth the three- 
barbed harpoon in order to slay his enemies, 

A, 2. In front of Homs of Belidet, lord of Mesen: [84, 7] / cast my thirty-barbed har¬ 
poon at the snout of the Hippopotamus, / wound the foeman of Him who is on the Mound* 

B, I. Above Horus of Behdet in the boat: [84, i] Utterance by Horus of Behdet, great 
god, lord of the sky, lord of the Uj^vr-Egyptian crown, prince of the Lower-Egyptian crown, 
kit^ of the ^ng(s) of Upper Egypt, of the kings of Lower Egypt, beneficent prince, the 
prince of princes. 

* For Oiu form of the isl pers, sing, of the indepemtent pronoun m* Junker, Gramm,, } S5- 

^ The three plurnl strokes under must be a sculptor’s error. 

f princesses aiui other womm here mentioned may well have constituted, or fanned part of, the choma 
for thia scene, in which the draimatic test, as it stands, provides no narrative for the Reader. 

^ See Commentary, n. ly. 

• Readiiie fpyl/t: as Gardiner has teinailed to us, a not inappropriate designation of Honw in this instance, 
for he is depicted standing not in a boat hut on land. For sU+prep. ^ sec also £. it. 85, 16; lit, 253, 8; iv, 
i 35 , 16; V, 152,4-5; VI, 236, tjjvii, JO, 132, 5; 308. 14. 


B, z. In front of Homs of Behdet: [84, z] 7 receive i/te crook and the tchip,for 1 am 
the lord of this land. 1 take possession of the Two Lands in {assuming) itw Double Diadem. 
I overthrow the foe of my father Osiris as King of Upper and l.>awcr Egypt for ever. 

C, I. Above Thoth: [84, 4] Utterance by Thoth, twice greats lord of Hermopolis, who 
judged the Ttco Gallants, pre-eminent in the Great Seat, great chief of the Greater Ennead 
(psdt whom no other can replace. 

C, 2. In front of Thoth: [84, 5] 7 overthrow thine enemies, 1 protect thy bark with my 
beneficent spoken spells. 

D, 1. Above the Queen; [82, 2] The Queen and Mistress of the Tit-o Lands, {Cleo- 
patrr^, God's Mother of the Son of Rer, {Ptolemaeus-may-he-lwe-for-ever-Beloved- 

D, 2. In front of the Queen: [8z, j] / make mtisic for thy pleasttre, 0 thou who shinest 
as King of Upper and Lower Egypt, thine enemies bemg in hordes' beneath thee (hr.k). 

E, 1. Above the lower row of women: [82, 8] The Lower-Egyptian princesses and the 
women of Busiris, r^oicirtg over llorus at his victory. 

E, 2. In front of no. i: [82, 10] JVe rejoice over thee, we delight in beholding thee, we 
exult at the sight of.., . 

E, 3. In front of no. 2: [82, 11] iVe raise thee joyful praise to the height of heaven, when 
thou punishesi the misdeeds of thine enemy. 

E, 4. In front of no. 3; [82, 12] W e worship thee and hymn thy Majesty, for thou hast 
laid low the enemy of thy father. 

F, r. Above the tipper row of women: [83, a] The Upper-Egypiian princesses and the 
women of Pe and Dep rejoicing over Horus at his appearance in glory. 

F, 2, In front of no. 1: [83, 3] We rejoice over thee, we are gloMened by the sight of 
thee, when thou arisest in brightness {for) us^ as King of Upper and Lower Egypt. 

F, 3, In front of no. 2: [83,4] We beat the tambourine^for thee, we exult at seeing thee, 
when thou receivest Ok office of Harokhti. 

F, 4. In front of no. 3: [83, 5] We make jubilation to thy similitude, when thou shinest 
for us like Rer shiuit^ in the horizon. 

G, In a single horizontal line above the relief; [82, 4] IIow happy is thy countenance, 
now that thou hc^t appeared gloriousty in thy bark. Moms of Be^t, great god, lord of ike 
sky, like Rec in the Bark of the Morning, when thou hast received thine office tenth crook and 
whip, and art crowned with the Double Diadem of Moms, Sakhmet prevailing over him that 
is rebellious toward thee, Thoth the great protecting thee,^ Thine inheritance is thine, great 
god, son of Osiris, now that thou hast smitten the Lower-Egypitan Bull.* Be glad of heart, 
ye inhabitants of the Great Seat, Horus hath taken possession of tlw throne of his father. 

DsA^L4TIC Text, (a) [queen.] [83, 6J Rejoice, ye women of Busiris and ye townsfolk^ 

* See Blfltkraui and FflirmaiiH Miicfllanra Gr/^itriona^ 415^ n. |8^ ^ EtTL^nding 

e The was actually not a tambounne but a slngle-Enembrane dnun, the modem foMr with which the 
word tbtt may well be etymologically couoccrted. 

^ Cf. the accompanying relief and E, VI ^ 83^ ii -ia. 

* I4 ,,£= here Tnerely a mistake or is 'thine enemy' or the tike omined after If the latter surmise 

is correct m hi mfty must be imdered 'in the guise of the Lower-Egyptiafi Bull', 

^ Mmz see Wh. lE^ 110, 9. 'Andjet was the capital of the ninth Lower-Egypdan (Buslritc) ncunc^ sec 
Gauthier^ op. cit., L 


beside ^Andjet! Come and see [//fjrixi} who hath pierced the Lower-Egypiian BuiU He 
walloweih* *• in the blood oj the foe, kis harpoon-shaft achieving a svnft capturey He maketk 
the river to flow blood-stained,*' tike Sahiimet in a blighted year. 

(b) [chorus of women of buseris.J Thy weapons phtnge'^ in mid-stream like a tcild 
goose beside her young oii£(f). 

(c) [chorus and onlookers.] Hold fast, Horus, hold fast I 

(d) [queen.] Rejoice, ye zcomen of Pe and Hep, ye t&ssnsfolh beside (r-gs) [83, loj fAe 

marshesl Cmte and see llorus in the prow of his ship, like R^r when heshineth in the horizon, 
arrayed in green cloth, clad in red cloth, decked^ in his ornaments, the White Crown and the 
Red Crown firmly set on his head, the two araei between kis brows. He hath received the 
crook and the whip, being crowned with the great Double Diadem while Sakhmet 

abideih in front of him and Tkoth protecteth himy 

(e) [chorus op women of pe and dep.] It is Ptah^ who hath shaped thy shaft, Soker 
who hath forged thy weapons. It is Ifedjhotp^ in the Beauteous Place who hath made 
thy rope from yam. Thy harpoon-blade is of sheet-copper, thy shaft of nbs-a-YW^ from 

(f) [hohusJ / have hurled with my right hand, I have swung with my left hand, as doth 
a bold fen-man. 

(g) [chorus and onlookers.] Hold fast, Horus, hold fasti 


Scene I 


Publi$hed: Naville, op. cit., pi. Dt; £. vl, 84“^! pb- dxi-dxh. 

Description of the Relief. Horus of Behdet, lord of Mesen, standing on the back 
of a hippopotamus pierces its forehead with his harpoon. Behind him is Isis, who 
supports the god's upraised left arm with her right hand. Facing them are nine 
divmities in two rows, four in the lower and five in the upper. Each divinity is supplied 
with an altar bearing that portion of the dismembered beast to which he or she is 

• Restore for wtuoh wrb sec IP&. 1, 419, fi. Possibly 

• Lit. ‘H« poun out the river in the colour of blood’. 

*• Verb pgr not in Wb., but E, tv, S44» *“3* where,'X'r'tf i* probably to be emended 

^ Cf. E, vj, 8s, s- For Sakhmet as the king's protectress see f ^ ‘The Son 

King N., comes forth from his house under the protection of (bi itAi «) Sakhmet', M,, tit, 5. 

^ Seey £,4 jtxix, 10. n. g. 

t See Comnicntary, n, 38. 

t For p^ n bii see also £. IV, 344, 3; V, 154, to; vj, 90, 21; 238, 9; and for nbt n hoi, E. tv, 344, 3-4; 
E. vt, 90, 21, 

^ References to the dismemberment of Seth appear already in the PiTamid Texts, viz, Fyr, §§ 154)6 ff.; 
1867; Boe also Junker, OnmiOigeHdt, 55, 



Djiamatis Personae 

Lower row 


Homs of Behdet, lord of Mesen 



Kh nura-Haroe ris 

Rhntim, lord of Elephantine | Upper row 

Dramatic Text 









Khnum, lord of Elephantine 





Subsidiary Texts. A, i. Above Horus of Behdet, lord of Mesen r [86, i] Utterance 
by Horus of Behdei, great god, lord of the sf^', lord of Mesen, rviio transfixe/ii the Hippo¬ 
potamus and cuttetb up his flesh, v:hick is given as a meat-offering to every god. 

A, 2. In front of Homs: [86, 2] Lift thee up, Osiris, great god, ruler of eternity. He 
who was hostile toward thee is dismemheredy 

B, I, Above Isis: [86, 3] Utteremee by Isis the great. Scorpion!^ of Behdet,god’s mother 
of Horus the Victorious Bull. 

B, 2. In front of Isis: [86, 3] Be glad of heart, my son Horus. Thine enemy'^ has fallen 
and is not. 

C. Beginning at the right end of the lower row, the nine divinities who partake of the 
dismembered hippopotamus are designated as follows: [84, 10-14] i. Osiris-Onnophris 
the triumphant \ Z, Haroeris, pre-eminent in Letopohs; 3. Onuris; 4. Wepwawet; 5. 
Tefinei, mistress of Mdd; 6. Khnum-Haroeris, whose feats are many; 7. Khnum, lord 
of Elephantine, great god, lord of the Cataract; 8. Nephthys; 9. Isis. 

Dramatic Text, (a) [re.ader.] [84,15] Isis opened her mouth to speak to her son Horus, 
saying y 

(b) [ISIS.] If thou cuttest up thy [85,1} great Hippopotamus, hasten thou unto me and 
draw nigh me that I may instruct thee. I say unto thee : Let hU foreleg be taken to Busiris 
for thy father Osiris-Onnopkris the trnmphcmt. Consign his ribs to ’lyt^ for Haroeris pre¬ 
eminent in Letopolis, while his shank* (?) remaineth in This for thy great father Onuris, 
Consign his shoulder to ’Ibt*'for thy great brother Wepwawet. Consign his breast to AsySt 

* All these nine divinities art menlioned in the dmiiatk tdct, but, with the cKceptien of Isia^ they are not 
usJ^ed speaking parts. ^ psii. ^ See Blackman and Faimtan, GregimaHa, 41^^ 0,75, 

^ Emend 

^ See 3CXV11I+ 33 with n. 7, 

f Name of the locality where the sacred treea of the $ecpnd Luwer-Egyptisn (Letopoliie) nomc were 
venentedf see Gauthier^ op. cit.» h 38^ Jutikcrp op. dl.i 16. 

t not in but fouridK G^itlincr trUau$» wiitien following simple Onomaatieon 

of Amenopit, No. 591; cf. alio jP>v» | *546*^* where foreleg^ is oontraated with 

^(j ^hi* lower foreleg"* "shank*. 

^ 7 hl, aocoi^ng to Gauthier* cp. dt.^ 65* is m mune for HermopoLtB Magna. 



for Tefimt mistress o/Mdd.‘ Give his thigh to Khnum-^ (85, 5] Haroerisf him whose feats 
are many, great god lord of the knife/ lord of strength, who overthroweth the foes, far he is 
thy great brother^ Give the large meat-portion of him to Khnum, lord of Elephantine, 
great god, lord of the Cataract, that he may increase the crew of thy war-galleyGive his 
rump to Nepkthys,for she is thy great sister. Mine is his forepart, mine is Ms hinderpart, 
for I am she who rescued the heart of the Weary-Hearted One,’ Mm whose heart failed.. 
Give Ms bones to the cats, his fat to the worms, his suet^ (?) to the Young Harpooners, that 
they may know the taste of his flesh. {Give) the whole forepart to their children, that they 
may perceive (?) [85, 10] the sweetness of his form, and the choice portion of Ms limbs to thy 
followers, that they may savour the taste of his flesh. So shall they drive thy harpoon deep {?) 
within him,* my son Horus, {even) the holy harpoon that hath entered^ into Mm, (into) that 
enemy of thy father Osiris. 

(c) [chorus and onlookers.] Hold fast, Horm, hold fast! 

Scene II 
AN interlude* 

Published; NavUle, op. cit., pL x.; E. vi, 86-7; xin, pi. DXiii. 

Description of the Relief. Homs of Behdet^ lord of Mesen, accompanied by Isis, 
harpoons a small model of a hippopotamus in the middle of the back. Facing him the 
King harpoons the buttocks of the somewhat lai^er figure of a bound human captive. 

Dramatis Personae Relief 

Horus Isis The King 

Subsidiary Texts. A. Above Homs of Behdet, lord of Mesen; [87* *] Utterance by 
Horus of Behdet, great god, lord of the sky, lord of Mesen, who captureih the Hippopotamus 
(nS) and cuitetk up his fiesk, which is given as a meat-offering to every god; who taketh the 
spear and tumeth back the crocodiles, who layeth low the foes at the slav^ht^-block. 

B, I. Above Isis: [87, 3] Utterance by Isis the great, the god's mother, who dweileth in 

B, 2. In front of Isis: [87, 3] Behold I am come as the Mother from Chemmis,*^ that 
I may make an end^* for thee of the MppopotamL Prithee be strong/ thou fierce Lion, 
Stand firm on thy feel against yon Hipp<^tamus and hold Mm fast. 

C, I. Above the King: [86, 6] The King of Upper and Lower Egypt, Son of 

Re'', ( Piolemaenis-may-he-live-for-ever-Belovcd-of-Ptal}^. 

C, 2. In front of the King: [86, 8] Horus, he carrieth off the Hippopotamus to his 

■ M4d, properly M4dn\\ ii perhaps the modem Dronk^h, Gaulhierp op. dl,p 26. 

^ See JyjLker, op. cit., 16 f. 

^ So Jimktr, Onuml^fude, 16^ seeako Wb- ii, 171^6—7 j 182, lo. Or should we cinend ^ AtfThj 

see Gauthier^ op. iii^ 25? 

^ This sentence suggests that Awan Mias as famous for its boatmen in andctit as it is in modem times. 

* Ut. *wHo rescued the Wcary-Hcmted One, (more exactly) his heut*; set above, JEA xjux, 16, n. j. 

f For this mcAning of gn^ see TTfr. v, 176^ ft. The fat about the kidneys is cDnsidered a great dain^ by 
the modem Blackman has seen men eating this fat mw while engaged in cutting up a newly 

slaughtered theep. ■ Lit. 'make long (?) thy harpooti irt him*. ** See W'ft, r\\ 301, 2. 

^ This Mnterlude* was possibly a mime, as there is no dramatic text aocoB:^>anying the relief. 

J Heading n?il n‘L 



residence (hnw*f) in Pe and Mesen. Rejoice^ O ye of Hetribtitim- Toem, Hort^ hath wer- 
throKn his enemies. Be glad, ye citizens of Bender all, . . . stabbed him telio svas disloyal 
to kim* and he existeth not. 

D. In a single horizontal line above the relief: [86,11] The noise of r^otdng resonndeih 
in Mesen, gladness issueth from Behdet, for Horus hath come that he may slay the NtdfiuTi 
and his confederates in [the place of slaughter^] (f). He hath cut off his head, he hath att 
out his heart, he hath drenched him in his oscn blood. WetjseuJHor and Denderah are in 
jubilation. Alack, alack, in Kenset! 

Scene III 


Publishi^d: Navilic, op. dh., pL xi; E, vt, 87-90: xiri, pi. nxiv. 

Deschiftion of the Relief. A butcher cuts up the figure of a hippopotamus' with 
a knife. Behind him Imhotep, wearing a leopard-skin vestment over a long linen robe, 
recites from a papyrus roll which he holds in both hands. Behind him, ^gain, the King 
pours grain from a cup into the open beak of a goose. 

Dramatis Personae Relief 

Dram.atjc Text 

- • Isis 

Butcher Butcher 

Imhotep Chief I>Ktor^ 

'fhe King The King* 

- - Prophets, fathers of the god, 

and priests 

Subsidiary Texts. A, In front of the butcher: [87, 7] The [skilled] butcher^ of the 
Majesty of Rgc (?), who cuts up the Hippopotamus, dismem^ed ‘s upon his hide. 

B. Above Imhotep: [87, 9] The Chief Lector, scribe of the sacred boohfs), Imhotep the 
great, son of Ptah. 

C. Above the king: [87, lO] The King of Upper and Lonser Egypt, {Blanli\, Son of 
Rer, (Blankfi. 

Dramatic Text, (a) [isis.] [87, 11] Thou seizest thy harpoon and doest what thou 
wilt {.S^) with it, my son Harm, thou lovable one. 

(b) [chief lector.] The Kir^ of Upper and /vower Egypt, {Blank'j, Son of Ric^ 
{Ptolemaeu5-may-he-live-foT~ever-Beloved-6f-Plah)^, is triumpkant in the Broad Hall, 
he hath overthrovm the Mntyw of all the countries of Asia. Lo, he is triumphant* in the 
Broad Hall, he hath suppressed his enemies, [88, ij he hath taken hold of his (sic) back, 
he hath clutched the foes^ (?) By their forelocks. 

■ The pr«n« of the 3Td pere. sing. masc. suffix in ten mte f seern^ to demand 'Homs hath stabbed' ratiwr 
than 'I hifve stubbed'. i* imnwciiately foUcwicd by what looks like the lower half of behind which is 

an almost entirely DbliterAted sign which w^e cannot identify; see E. xtii, pL dxiei. ^ See Chassinars n. 

^ This a 'take or Loaf of bread moulded in the shmpe of a hippopotamus^ sec E, SS, t, 

=* The hmciiona, which in other scenes we have awitmed to the ‘Reader\ were surely, in this scene at leasts 
perfoimed by a Cfiief Lector ihty-hht sec E, z}, who possibly Impersonated Imhotep; see JEA 

xxvitlp ^6* ' The king is alluded to in the dramaric text, but is assigned no speaking part. 

f Heading mnftpry [rrm/i] « JT'“; s« Chassinat'a n. 7 and E. \% 143, 12^ In Commentary^ fi* 6, 

iV probably wrongly in this context, read rj. « Emending sk m m 

^ ^in-m ia pn>bab 1 y a miatake for and mir for dir; see ITft. ill, 2S0, 8; E, iv, 3; v* 37* 7, 


(c) [stage-direction.] brjsgis'g in the hippopotamus in the form of* a cake 



Be gladt ye teomen of Busiris, Horus hath overthroam kh enemies, ftejoke, ye inhabitants of 
Wetfset-Hor, Harm of Behdel, great gad, lord of the sky, hath overthroten yon foe [88, 5] 
of his father Osiris, O Onnophris, thy strength is (restored) to thee, they who are in . 
fear thee; the lords of the thrones shout in Joy to thee. 

This is Horus, the protector of his father Osiris, teho fighteth mth his horns, who pre- 
vttiletk ,, . seising the Perverse One; scho smiteth the foes. 

(e) [stage-direction.] bringing in the goose, POURIN& GR. 4 /jV into ITS MOUTH. 

[chief lector,] ... [fforwr], son of Isis, son of Osiris, on this auspicious day, by the hand 
of(?) the Kin^ of Upper and Lower Egypt, (Blank}, Son of Rer, (Ptolemaeus-may-he- 
live-for^eper-Beloved-qf-Ptah}, who hath come from (?)... [88,10] Im Kindly (?) Snafw; 
he hath illumined the Two Lands with hh beaut}\ his Holy Eyes and his Darling Eyes being 
open (?) . , . with his Jiery^ breath . . . gore, in order to restrain the body of him who is 
disloyal to him. The fame, [89, i] it consumeth the body ...of him ihatplotteth against 
(.?) him. Hurrah for Horus daily, a joy to his father every day, who maketh impotent^ 
[him who?] the heart (?) against him, who maketh an end‘* of him that trespasseth 

against him, _ . 

Triumphant is Horus of Bekdet, great god, lord of the sf^', over his enemies* He ts 
fallen, ( 7*0 be repeated) four times. Triumphant are Hatfmr, mistress of Denderah,^and 
Thoth, twice great, lord of Hermopoiis, over their enemies. (To be repeated) four times. 
Triumphant is the King of Upper and Lower Egypt, (Blank}, Son of Re^, (Ptolemaeus- 
may-hedive-f(H-eveT-Betoved-of-Ptaii},(rLer [89, ^yiis enemies. (Tobe repeated) four times. 

(f) [chief lector.] Horus in his strength hath united the Two Lands. Seth is over~ 
thrown in the form of a hippopotamus. The Falcon-goddess is come^ to the House of Horus 
and she saith to her son Horus: 

(g) [ISIS.] Thy foes bow down and are destroyed for ever, O thou Avenger of thy Father, 
Come that I may instruct thee, Cons^n his foreleg to the House of the Pnnce^ for thy 
father Osiris Rsy-wd), while his shanl^^ (?) remaineth tn Dep for thy great father Ipy-sl^d. 
Let his shoub^ be taken to Hermc^lis (Wnw)/or Thoth, the great one m the valley. Give 
his ribs to Great-of-Strength and his breast to Wnwt.* Give the great meat-portion of him 
to Khnum in the Temple (?), his neck to [89, lo] Uto of the Two Uraeus-goddesses i?)Jor 

i _ for m* OtlwTwiw — is the gtnetiv’Bl b and ^ » ^^<0 « to be rrfidered *the hippopotaimis of 

Fl.lfftad'. ^ S'* 

* See FaulknCf's note on F, 13, M, in JEA mill, 17^- 

<• Sec Coflunentary, n. 34. * Einendini!: 6 /iy‘enemy'. * EmendinE j|l] . 

I Sec Gauthier, op. dt., IV, 117-8; not, eppsuently, the RwlAty of Sethe. Dfomatiichc Tfjffe, 41, m the 
man inside doc# not carry a sceptre as veil as a staff. the epithet of Osiru, means the Healthy 

W^ful One’, tY6. 11,451. 

^ S«e p. lip n. 

See Scihe, UrgeSihtehie, §§ 16, 13, 32, 60. 


she is thy great mother. Give his thigh to IHorus the Primordial One,*^ the great god who 
first came into being. Give a roast of him to the birds which execute judgement in Db^wt,'' 
Give his liver to Sepa^ and his fat to the disease^demotts^ (f} of Dep. Give his bones to the 
Hmw-iy(t)(?), his heart to the Lower-Egyptian Songstress* Mine is his forepart, mine is his 
hinderpart, for I atn thy mother whom he oppressed. Give his tongue to the Young [90, i] 
Harpoonerst the best of his inward partf^ (?) to. .. . Take for thyself his head, and (io) 
assume the White Crown and the office of thy fatlter Osiris. What remaineth of him burn 
in that brazier of the Mistress of the Two Lands (?), hath given thee the strength of 

Mont, and for thee, O Harm, is the jubilation (?). 


Published: E. Vl, 90; J, Dumichen, Ge<^aphische Imchrijten. i, pi. lxxxviii. 

There is no relief attached to the following text, which was no doubt recited by the 
Reader or Chief Lector, who, as he may have done in the preceding scene, possibly 
impersonated Imhotep, 

[reader OR CHIEF LECTOR.] [qo, 3] liotus of Behdet, great god, lord of the sky, is trium¬ 
phant in the Broad Hall, and overthrown are the enemies of his father Osiris, of hts mother 
Isis, of his father Rec, of Tkoth, master of hieroglyphic writing, of the Ennead, of the Great 
Palace (Hwt-trt),^ of Abydos, Cop/Mj{Ntrwy),» Hwt-ntr,’' Wetjset-Hor, Behdet, Denderah, 
and Kkant-Iebt,^ and of his Mc^esty himself, the Son of Rer, {Ptolemaeus-may-ke-live- 

* See Sethe> dU acht Urg^ttufy p. 4^^ 2. 

^ Perhaps thcr<; is a reference here to the cult of the heron at sec Winlock^ iv^ i2;.Sethej iVdcfrr, 

Gottingen, 1921^ p. 35; Id.^ ap. Barcbardr, Grohdmknmt dei Konigi ij, Text, p. 103* 

« S« TV* 471 \ Brc^ted, Edmn Smith Sttfgkal Pap^, p* 477+ 

^ See Blackman and Fairman^ Mitt^lhinta Oregoriona, pp. 42a fL, n. 9S, 

i does not appear to record this word, but cf. possibly ^ | "hold* of a ship, op. cit., 326, i. 

f The temple of the sun-j^od ai Hehopolk; see Gauthier, op. dt., IV, 54.. 

f See Gauthier, op, dt.. ill, loS. Or perhaps we should read ^ntywy Seth*, Urgerchicht^, § 51), i,*. 

^ Apparently the name of the tt^npyi 'holy mound’ of Neref, the necropolis of hferacleopolb Magna; 
see E* Vl , 124^ 6. 

i The fourteenth Lower-Eg^-ptian (Torule) notne, of which the capital w&a SOe (Pw); see Gauihkr, 
op. dt., iVp lySp f; Setbe, op. cit., 4 78. 



aAlcc&JXA^ t gtftA ^l^ as 

E-I> 0V/®;ffwtjfit (ft U(4td<if ^ 

uj Jff, »^,a;f»o>;Sff,/4j®;i«*f;’i/ it:wilJ^ vn,p^.ft .2, 

;s^i;jBi«7,/j;W<.p*a Kftiiifl^, rrai^.J;4aa./».‘gzf?:g-y.’ Ef,jy«, j';i«,i;|ii?afiy,f Cf, ^—f © A 

Jl*^l p.^ ’'^^ jR^tiAMDul ^JJ»j // ■^Xs Jfi£JI^^4CLr^ZeX ^ i4dit^ait tr«4t- 

^il (/m#Ui^ ' - MjcL I- ^ ^ famg At<M^ 

^ JffZ ^/ua!y i£tfic^ £r 

V ^ H ^ ^jhj^ AwnCan^, 

3^. S^^fr^ay /.j7^mj ^J Ac. af w c&j mM €t/vvX mtjfxciil^ 


^a^2^A^^Aati^i€r^ iX^ajU^ i^^jta&^ S-^^r ftndr 

^flAjtV j^ cko^fljulr Jj S^ui^MiaJtk ^ m iUMmfJtAtiifir 

tilJCht/ Mlt^M W At ^JKj f4uZ Afff# ^wt- 

*1s °i|^ 1 mil^^DjB.^^st 6~J.liXsd^dclt. jtfAeAgi^^aAcvj£AJfl^ jft 

a/w<^ J^Ui AefciwA^y 

X»tr ^ S^n^^Jii^wtf ^ lid S^Tmt S^if^ft^Ja t^anUUl^^S Irifluf, Wffi&r itW 

X^C jn. dfAt (^.i; /rfl. ^ ^f'-^ H V dnjy ^ 

w /8ii,^i&adg4^ 3^^ q j/ J(LidisCf^^ 

Aa ^M ftrftjiy iiSefiA j/ 

jfti^4f^ tofLteaJ/rf^ertri ciflftaArf 

^ivt9€£^ti;e&jn/^ih^^ -Cajafi^Xaie’J&2 j a]^ Ae. totrig jf ^3^^ 


amd Wt/tAtAtnUt^ tl^vUikiS. vntti o itk^.im, Htf jdituF^ 

^j/tct«^; a j Sa 

^rffl^^01tij:/At Sfu/ud tkutiiivit iroJ. jftgtJ-ea 4nd .tk«vi-tX£eaAa,:JAc.Jt^niawr^ii ^ 


4>h^ -fl* ^&iylif 4f7i£ ^ Jrffl c£0^4j;rf iSi^iin- ^^ tstomi^, rn^om. ftfiXKen/" 

51^#.', S 2=? MZ'&. (i->j 


lfilLamAs£fI^4 4mifC^^oIm^MX-^^£4^AA^ (irtZtJimw cmZLa^ 5«& 0i>.M^4£4 

jOt*f^jf^ilai^ am-S j^a6 ol^laiii^ Lt^.^Mnlf^J. mitLftlAmjAzciun^ ijrtx ^£h HtM 

^ifuiC^d^jUvi^ ^n^^4UH^44Tv eiira£,£i£ yiif^kdiS^am^aASO\Ilfrt‘4f^f^/tjii. ^octis^ 

Mutr X^A^DfislQ^iuKl^nr lAi XoJ ffeecJ^on^ .Zi^4 iw&^ ^&c Jijimi^iS ftj 4ifill t 

liiiTS lu ^- 

tjfl ^ 44flaA ' ijalU ^ ion/amdm^ A^m.^ 

tmliu jAiUcAti ^yf Wo/u^A'OjUK^ Af[£ fwn£. iiw 

(kitifl ^:S4 <l» UiiMAely Alt Itid^tttd He. S^lh -M^£^ 121^f 

AtavUyloJtn. omJr ifi Lii^^i 

t£¥f%. Aftwi/y jltO-i^ilvn^- uf Arnl . £At. Atm^OmA du~ 

OtiiW dJ AUyw A*' ^ mc<l^ d^rx^ ^ 

iJm fi^ *AoJ^JeIA>^wa^-^oM4Y^ AlfKrJ&oZan jft^^ubS«/ datrinstSiLiiXkt:r eacJuAt^ 

ouditn, dAtcA jW^Obrf. I^mj/jj S&r^ dmimAlArf \-£A4q4^X. ^ H^ih ru^r^jmAdHstjjJklAfHiin^ 

fi<{I CirwLj.jtcj J^AiA.^g.^ JJi ^J- ^ IiAjA£ Adr4£ ■4EJ^iH{^E>iyffidH AcoAot* Jet IHaeA/rui^. 

Cj <AA^S$^nAtA^Ailely lornle^^ 

lidi o^Iki, toTTy^^ A) bjlX i^dturj iSc^t cbmA Al^ comf^dtAohi ais4i^^ 

i;ia; 177,17; 


i 8 

M Auc^^-Jtd WV C&nj mc4MV JiCt'iWfr ? 

Oful dU£/um^ fi/.tr^ULiGmmMn^^ 

jf fj^ /tf Aa C£s£^jn^*a^*D*firf*ta^ ^ am# 

d ^A o1 

I wcm^^arny X*J rty -gcUy^Wj fiAtay ^0^ ®IF, Qt 

At is'iniitiiitji arhjoni^ £Ai Jj^irullK o/ ^i^*€it 
ij w£,£/Ag Jt jfjtfT"Aji. (.^] ifA^Ajt^iirlk^ /^ ^ ii_^ --*— 40^ pi^— n ^ 

y^JtAr HI J&^JoAe O^ 

>AtJ fUnilA ^a&o^fltflf Itdrtytflmit, 5* 

Aa^'t^ro^ cf AidjAotp^ 5l BT, iuj^ ^ lutii aJUc d4Jtl^n.aitd R n r 5 |^/^5.Jit 

Xjbtts ac£ai<0«fl^y a^-Ainv ^ Jj4t c«*Tnj^maZ eiffi4tK^ Xt a- 

^ 'tj* ^ ^«i^WTltd[ ijj SfflVUlAli 

j 'J/; ir,f77^/]f; ja; /J^/i;u£/j; W,3€fj^S; p ck^a^aiUt^ 


/A^^/'■/j,jimJ jttfe Jioft^-nutAi'r^ 

*n&5»ca^ in-AaJ 

(disttujstd aZsome^XmjlkJ^ ^i£ ^?f«, fe ta; ^^ ai^ 

JIAt aut4e/>/ti^doi4 fijZ' 

fnaAt^ U'^O^uXit^ Jo OA^kij^atitn^ de^^iiA& 

^ aiw0./iJjjj OJ Wf cu^tWi^ 

(p^ tflyt/oymiiR- 

tiuilitM^$ iuwt cAm^ 

%. (jet TJf 

sf/Atr iirS^ ’v<iMtt^ j^lAAtdu^ an^Ji/Otf0n^e^Of^ Jj 

ittTusl^kin^4m^S^^pfiel’$<m^JAa^/^ ^^sXumLaZ'Ji^iA^ieAaA 

Vej yptillL^dt fiuLuMHui t^xjcti^^nd^ ^ s^mnsSAt 

jftCpwL eun^ ® ® - ail Ak Z.^5 XLW^ 



icf^ £U a^ u^uiA%t(^.W^ 1 ^ tjf 

Hit dt /WZ^aswTLejftAffi/ |/s fuA^ 

^t^^ .Sj^, iAfc yLwArticv jjiA-iya^iSArv <j 

^ 4 /* 4 y .‘‘tin^Oir^a^ (/u£e^ w^ihuhAa^ f xgr ^ 

/J^ ? ^)!j^ wtiainA^ Sii^s^^j^tfixiL o^Jkt ccTutt^xti dAdtXU> i/Eoi 

(imffhy XAoS€^ pf Cim^£ifi/exX^nX^^ 

fn*jt^T^ ifM it ) 41^ fitfl ti /akotx y^. it)^smd> £A^ 'U tft^imd ' WWA 

Auitk^Janj. J^fi<:ii^iy^^ jL>f ^ t^TTJsSl 

^tt^£/y co^ ijfeiii^tj^ Jnwi.yi£ftv 

jlAg/iy >A^gfhJ^^ it, 

4 i dui ol^.iSU ifiii^/^nds 5 <yyu?^i^iU jfj iA-ffi 

/i ciutolt tfgGaA^^ n? f^jr ^ rfjj'j^li' 

W<u^ ituJi^ i«AwiU Ciy-ztui*t-j (s:-B, 3 <i«, ^+* lo, 

+/. i5!i4» ^vtX^iUl jiaS3«J^,'ZlI, Jlf,i,el«Mt^ skurtihli 1^ ofjtk^iAti, jlat^itf 

A^^d2W C4*BUr^ y Xf^ fAoit J€<, iX* £^ .^dtl J«yyi^ wy«#Ul ^ 

ScCtA^^^'^^AJiat J^gt^ Jac 4 ^ /Traafvt^Ty JJ 

/£iA« 041^0^ ^A«i Xt^/tt5^X£^^J^-J^r|^£j^i?t«. 

iniAtAknXii^tA^£iA4‘fi^4in'jff[Xf.^^ -fUlrfM 

LJ3in ^1. 

Mutl'Xi€Mio^d^ m, F- 13 , J^^l; J-ctieisuf 



— IniK ^Aim&U^'t 4e<aJCTlffJtriA 

O ^ 41 ^ 1^ j friA . Bf^ 1 

c^JJa Jail.fmMl asH^n^d ^£4* ^AffPLiCit 

^ cdc£oTUfMt£ti»,>£^ vn^ of XAi/ fU3flni/'AAfft>*l^ Jwv ^rtjaiEiiu- i, 

^ Xtf ^f/cwssSiZtt 

-MLS wAeeZ'^ ^t^:^iu£a£in^ aMidj^y & ^d^^Z^iESj Bj^rayity- 

efi£ dLS ^tMV aliyenxifMti^ itfWMjMn^ ZU£«^^fflUAA&r! j. ^ 

l; J^,l;ay|,3. J^^%j:&^}^^j^;6%^'^M,f^if.. ^(a.) l£nyA«-.iU^W 

^ ^^.b/Aci4^yi£M£J3£ ^fii£^du4i^W fjt<7rniTUj| ^ (Aj"^ 

dAsJ^jffiAcc^VZ^]^ln^^ Cvidc'ndlfj JiiJriitii^tS dAi Vitiu<Bdvfnf ^J4v (juMI!ls.~^.W4 

3&%4?uyiaAi^ StOuff (X^rmjttf nm^ Q^J\£ liAj^vCttB ^4-9-'f^- 6.iS(rtuJ^J J 6 c= X 0 -0%^ Hj-^&dJy 3£u,filii*y 

Jkito^\ y. 'iftht^^fil*aMUtmtt^c>f Tfe* «W 3S#144J, ? Oit/mnuj of 

XhiA. ^aJlft,]^.lR,iy,S. t^Afuwif *itoth,<i^*i3ta^nyiU eflkbiiAUin^ ^ ’^^ia^£A£^,(fa>tA»,^iadiijf, 

I^vaimLL h^ur fitit o^CAt^mMisudu£A, A*J#wiAiit dh& i& oua.^^ASP ayBi 

faj ^^ O A*i 4-sAi7t^ ^£Ac 4 Tl-J/Mrf C^-£ 4 t Jiet At ^ J&L I 

et 4^4^ M l s.Tjwmis' 

^ ^AhHtl Jnij E. n, / 37 ^ 2 wlilS^IOS rafrilt '/a* JUj.WY’^' 

tkcAiiL^ faiecTt -tiii^co^t frtJtkftttm^MtxiMijfm, in, Cftfnfr otitaf Cjyfti(^Liiisl,), 

^ 3 ^ ^t^xJcTvrty A«wfs jglA- iwwt' li A Sp^dlifl^ of jiTj^^ijlfJiffuiA 3 g At 

i/zzA^ j.-f t’ aAli£^^J ^ i0i4rj Mro^ ■ 43!f^ noil$iiA^\nt$tmyJihnj£fci^^ Jlcf\io,£i/^^ ^ 

(^, A^o 2^^ S/- ^ if4jtJbf5&iiAt 4f^d££m £# 1 /^^ 

.Aym W Aeiscirjily. U iiTt^_£«:,jA^ifiaAj^£JliiCr*n-^^^ f 7^J 



^ ^ O-B „ 

Mtii ^n/ft 

■^^.Ar£y {fn.ALtJiiaiL aMjLA&iLiJjLllm. alLALf mAmZtwjcj tmr\ 

tj AiijlS ET^ialr-w^, fcij ^ 

dku^CA^mff\LsMd^^^fkai'dsIinfU^IkLHct^-Ia^,ti/dkA^^ ElT^a 

5j^ j Cki&^xtftj:^^ £ aW ,^3^* ^Worteii ow- amX^^O^ 

(fiiy HtAaij jbTrt/ ,AAiit iflAjE^ii4«rf ^ 4fvJ ^Art-gj. jji^ 

4 ^Mw?t/'.i^er ^4/ y. yiy (c^ jfitfr rta£ A 

^ C^Ci^ G?;^C^A^ ^ j^tl j /ti»A.fljVLjfc 

Xat ZhA JILn At£Z^ £ph/:Fanan^ a4£ ^ AfLct 4mjifi^ OJiA/n pTTn^ii^ g, Ota/Tn^titf^ ^S&idc JtAi^ 

i/OtCt Ac^CiPn^S f ptj&y} Adlr JliUf ifCffmcS Ae£cj7n.b$ TTn^^pd^' ^>Af ^Ofr^ 'Aecen^ej 

J 3^j, J ijjij i^3 j ^t. iAa^Ci m o^ Aij- 

'jfl/flce' ZtOfTM^ iA4 MipiU. ^tA< /fFjy ftK ■ 

^ZAaf ^ticA'acA^n^iiJ^ Cia^^^ztAcy^ 4 / 44 ^ 1 ^ J]yn' 

i2ZAiiyAr^£|WAi, SjfTieAprt.htAi^ tt# 

CA*7nflt4J. ^ kSJ 

^ i ^ i^Vi ^*^j' arrui ij^ A«tT«£^ jwwM^ Akat^^ Zk^ 4fc#f 

A<^ tu ^Aaf jt/y ; ^ JTfiJ,3rt n athAJ j^\.*r^ 

anz^' iijftf * 54 av:. iji*? pet^ dbijJ4^iiL a^oul vij irt’E ^ *^wi w r. JT^iofi^i ^ j4a 

^ f^&a^ {fo o J M^ 'fdanh miflu^icd uiAJitLam.i , JjMot-e %}&A& on Alflur! 

a.Af ^44l£L alJ^lk^\£iidvTu^ a^Zh. jdaTZ-r\am£. n+^.B^itjj^ 9t^ ^dw aac- IdWh^ I 

i^itr/itaxLi^ikt^Jl^^>d^3*i^^ ? (Q.J ^ftA fljli jt^ a I T €1 ^,^F=i (Jjutf Su^ 

^mi^i>d^t^,,.,r.fuIiaA Ai?^ ^^A^. j^U^na^gji/"' E fl)r^ 

Afti4 WKL ^jSi££kt^w\£l.idmjj Si^difn/of tijo afl^ 

1 1^ - ¥ ^ 

■t*rt/»Ttj^ AanW^MCit **'0 e; ^ 0 ^ hnstiuiUii tit iUSt, Frti!^tJ»^ , J, jifil^, j&t. jSiBiiA^t, 

ff'tiiim^sc^ ifyni^ (^-y^frifTj J*fr ffa,4ir+ji?.wri;Ujrj'/i[t,Jo|r (J. 



etXU^,lii^S. Aufvn^m imW i)f o-UiTfVLttjn ami flJSorxM^i^^ 


^Juy u/tAMi Ih^sk ^ HC^ JIJ ^ GUiiy ^- 

jcA^^uvi^oi/ <L^ubta/Ze^in> ^ a^ jrA^ a jp«£' 

vJuKMw'rt^ ywiliv^'A^y*^'. (2^ f ljJir,^j,u; dw/T^ffl “ em- 

Xtais^ahon/tdin^ofJ^,{>tisJietA/ktntt'*iPiwlJ^oiAl^^wfUtL'^^.JufiJt^Mtiiean^vl.t ^ntj^KtAaiitar 
Mf^I^lt^l^fv ffi eiit Aiure ii^^asfiaWe^ o^ A aAJ .^«r?n 4i£j#ff^fiyj««t^ajs *«' i&mettT+ify Xfc 

fl/ Aj^j^ *jitit^i 

CoWy^^gfa^ ift3^adt maft ^ iAAa/k Ntjeetfa^ea^ ^^^gmartAj ^ 

W:^^^^iieBiiAK^Aea(£^Bfi. ^.3^^lta(Xjdc).Atad StAktfm^Amkhnam\um*ffir 'SM*tft 
WJi MTn 5fv\ jlt. y0^,3l*fELJ^ -jmtjts *fi ftoi^ ^ ^ 

£^,fli^\%zltiajtSf{ift 'f&urfj'vtiaJ ^ Aji^^teact 'Aj jl *Sli^ ’jk£^ V*V ’Af'wJ>>:^ ^lS^mAc ^UfdJ ^^04 

V *itimi’'f»ndf«i ^\ta4‘ U i il.,.^ll^' ^Lnifij *AtA<t *’ imiJA t£ij'H.JtX)(5',^,j^W,R,^S’;^fll'*^ 

^4iv,A,j»s^i:^®'Afifl*i ^.p ^^,itJ(/^.lSs:c}i fiA. m a«m( ''?<^ 

^Atiki StaA ^ sr^ iuS^it^MiansiAttS^ 

^f^tm^kcT^^A^dd ^j|&UH64- JfAm* I 

^^lS^li^S'^*£uid.*OfAt A£a£i^d^ ij-JtiiW^RfiA^cJjtjftJ 1 1 1 1 

4 n^vni/ji ^SfvS^ dj ijjiiA tad^ hMm £ 

( 23 ) 



This paper is the resuscitation of a controversy which had been in progress for a 
number of years before the present war and in which I played a humble part. Until 
Sethe raised the issue in 1913, no Egyptologist doubted that Mr BhdH was 

specihcally the god of Edfu, and that ^ Bhdt was from the outset a name of the Upper 
Egyptian town whose other name J@ Dbt has sur\dvcd in the Coptic Tfeat, Tfec. 
and the Arabic Edfu* The magnificent Graeco-Roman temple still existing in 
that town, with the almost innumerable inscriptions graven upon its walls, seemed 
too decisive for any contrary theory even to come to birth, and if Brugsch in 1879' 
already knew of a Delta district called ^ BhM, as well as a Bhdt Mht ‘Behdet 

of Lower Egypt’, to which in the following year^ he added a libt{t) 

'Eastern Ilehdet’,i it did not occur to his mind nor to that of anyone else that the 
original Behdet might have lain in the North. The first suggestion of this is to be 
found in Sethe's commentary on the fragmentary' scenes of the funerary temple of 
King Sahuref at Abusir, and was called forth by a representation of Horus the 
Behdetite among other Lower Egyptian deities,* Being well aware of the many places 
where that god is depicted facing Stk Nbti 'Seth of Ombos’ (near Tukh on the 
left bank nearly opposite Coptus),* Sethe now conjectured that the original Bel^det 
was at Damanhur, some 61 km, along the railway from Alexandria to Cairo, a con* 
siderable distance inland and well to the west of the Rosetta branch. The name 
Damanhur is pure Egy-ptian, Dmi-n-Hr meaning ‘Town of Horua’, 

How little confidence, however, Sethe at that time felt in regard to his new hypothesis 
is proved by the fact that elsewhere in the same work he rendered as Horus 

von Edfu.* ^ 

If this seemingly innocent conjecture had remained the purely geographical matter 
it was at first, it might have been dealt with much more summarily than it will be here. 
In point of fact the location of Behdet has become a crucial factor in what I may term 

» EHtiitmtiairt g 4 ographique, 540 C » Op. dl,, SupplAwnt, ia6fi, 

* Now known 10 be Nag' el-Mishiyikh, on the E. biink nearly opposite Girga. see ZAS UtXllt, 73 f., and 
more fully in my Aneimt Egyptian Onmmutiea [in pTopSnitionl, under Nw. i a. 35a of On. Am. 

* BoroharJt,pios GrabdttOanaidesKon^t SafturE (bencefonh quoted as Boroh., Sail.), ti, pL 19; Text, p. 79. 

* It had lonir b«n known f™ Juvenal (though he was sometimes thought to have been tt^taken) that 
there was an Omboa in the neighbourhood of Dendcnh. Petrie, however, was the first to find the actual 
site in 1394-5. “id Ids dlsoovery there of the rmuiiiis of the temple of Seth diapoaod of the djfiiculty that the 
temple of the other Omboa not far north of Elephantine ((“iJJJijo NJjt. KBm Ombo) did not mendon 
Seth at all, but only Suchus and Haroeri*; also the names of the two place* are differently spelt in hicroglj’phic, 
aee below, p. 33, n. t. Roeder, ait. Set in Roscher'a Lexiean, rv, 72S, claims that Dclmichen had earlier 
reoogniaed that the OmbcM of Seth must have Uin near Nakidah and Ballus; reference to DOmichcti's Gta- 
grapkie Ag^ptent, 125. the paasage quoted by Roeder, fails to reveal any such conjecture. 

* Borch., Safi., 11, Text, pp. 101, tay. 



the new Euhemerism—^the doctrine that the titles and myths of the early Egyptian 
gods reflect successive periods in the predynastic history of Egj'pt. The most elaborate 
expose of that doctrine is Sethe’s Urgeschiehte und dlteste Religion (1930), in which a 
whole series of consecutive stages are deduced by this method. Many scholars have 
taken a part in the debate on one side or another, but Sethe’s most strenuous opponent 
over the question of Horus the Behdetite has been Kees, above all in his book Hoti;s 
imd Sesh ak Gott^paar (1923-4),’ where it is denied that this Horus was ever the god 
of Lower Egypt and affirmed that the original Bchdet was Edfu, as all Sethe’s pre¬ 
decessors had believed. 

My own intervention occurred in 1918,® the points upon which 1 insisted being 
{i) that since Horus of Behdet w'as, from the earliest times, contrasted as the repre¬ 
sentative god of Lower Eg\'pt with Seth of Ombos, the god of Upper Egj'pt, the 
original Behdet must have been situated in the North, and (2) that though Homs of 
Behdet was worshipped at Edfu at a very early date, it is only at the end of the 
Twelfth Dynasty that Bhdt first appears as an alternative name for Dbi, (3) I also 
expressed doubt whether Sethe was right in placing the Lower Egyptian Behdet at 
Damanhur, pointing out that at least one text at Edfu equates Behdet with Sambehdet 
{Smf-Bhdt), the name given to the XVI Ith Lower Egyptian nome, that of Diospolis 
Inferior. In the following pages I shall endeavour to reinforce the views thus ex¬ 
pressed, It is now proved that Sambehdet was situated at Tell el-Balamun, 25 km. 
south-west of Damietta and only about 20 km. from the Mediterranean coast. 1 shall 
produce reasons for thinking that the name Sambehdet was a meaningful expansion 
of Behdet, and that the places designated by these tw'O names, if not completely 
identical, were at all events not far distant from one another,^ My second point 
probably requires modification. Incidentally, some curious new facts will emerge in 
connexion with the symbol of the winged disk. In conclusion, reflections on the nature 
of the country between Behdet and the sea will transpon me, however reluctantly, to 
the fringe, if not actually within the arena, of the euhemeristic contest. 

I, Horus the Behdetite as the god of Lower Egypt 

That Horus was regarded as the national god of Lower Egypt was asserted by 
Pleyte* as early as 1865, and though a decade later we find Eduard Meyer^ contra¬ 
dicting him with a dogmatism as absolute as it was unjustifiable, this view has con¬ 
tinued to gain ground, receiving a strong impetus from a text to which Goodwin first 
called attention in 1873.® This was the text subsequently studied by Breasted under 
the title ‘Philosophy of a Memphite Priest’’ and later re-edited by Erman and by 
Sethe. In that text, the recent copy of a composition of great antiquity, the god Geb 
divides the whole of Egypt between the two rival claimants, allotting Upper Egypt 

Thf twD puta are henceforth quoted as Ip Kees It. The full discussion of Select from the geo¬ 
graphical point of view ia in thfl Appendix (ll» jt ff.), a diU^t piece of work, from which there is much to 
be Jefutir- * JEA 223, 

^ Gauthierpi>^t.£i^c^.p 11, hkewisepkeea Behdet at TeUd-BalamQiip but both he re dtid io N 07 rKjd*Ji^*ptf, 
165 fF.p fdiU to $t9ite hb reiaons. 

* ZAS iiip 5+. ^ Ed. Mcycf, Set-Typhm (1875)1 3J- 

* Ch^bv^^ Mtkptgef ^ypioivgiqti^t, 3rd seriesp t, 247 ff.* and pardcuIaxLy 283. ^ ZAS :QiXiA^ 39 ff. 


to Seth southwards from Su, his birthplace somewhere to the north of the Fa^um, 
and Lower Egj’pt to Homs northwards from the neighbourhood of TurahJ 

The question here to be discussed, though reposing upon the same kind of evidence 
as the thesis just mentioned, introduces an entirely new issue. The stress is now upon 
the place-names. It is no longer simply Homs and Seth who are under consideration, 
but since the monuments so often contrast the Seth of Ombos with the Homs of 
fiehdet and since Ombos is known to have been a town near TQkh and Ball^ in 
Upper Egypt, there has always seemed a great likelihood that the original Behdct was 
in Lower Egypt. Could this be proved, then the contention that Horus was the 
national god of lx>wer Egypt would obviously be much strengthened, and if in 
addition the whereabouts of Behdet could be ascertained, a certain re-orientation 
with regard to the mythical histor}' of the god would become necessary, 1 begin bv 
noting that ^ BhJt is not mentioned in the Pyramid Texts, a curious fact which 
imperatively calls for explanation. 

Following the example of Sethe, Kees takes the figured representations as his 
starting-point, and begins with the well-known design of the union of the Two Lands 
{1, 7 fF.). At the very outset he comes across a scene appearing to contradict the notion 
that Horus was the god of Lower Egypt. This is sculptured on the chapel of Ment- 
hotpe III from Denderah.^ To right kneels Homs; to left, beyond the sign of union 
J, was once the figure of Seth, subsequently deleted ; behind each god stands one of 
the ^ Mr/-goddesses, and the damaged inscription of the goddess to the left proclaims 
her the Mrt of Lower Egj'pt. The published photograph is poor, but the facts appear 
to be as Kees stated them. This is by no means the only awkw'ard testimony of the 
kind, and later on Kees quotes, for example, a coronation scene where Seth, though 
qualified as *Iord of Upper Egypt*, offers to the king the crown of Lower Egypt 
{i, 15). It is useless to examine all the similar data which Kees brings fonvard. The 
answer tn such discrepancies is that the weight of evidence in favour of Homs as the 
god of Loiver Egy^pt is absolutely overwhelming. The explanation of facta like that 
just mentioned is probably that these scenes were all intended to emphasize the union 
of Egypt under a single ruler, and the result of this act would be to accord all the 
kingly attributes from both halves of the country^ to one and the same royal person. 
Hence, too, the national gods could Interchange attributes. If I in my younger days 
had donned a French friend's beret and he had borrowed my College blazer, nothing 
could have better stressed the Entente Cordlale. 

Kees next turns to the series of sitting statues of Sesostris I discovered by Gautier 
and Jequier at Lisht.^ Here the stereotyped scene of union is depicted on iMth sides 
of every statue. On two of the ten statues the opposing gods are personifications of 
Upper and Lower Egypt, and on three more they represent abstractions of one kind 
or another. The remaining five portray Horus and Seth face to face, Seth invariably 
grasping the plant of Upper Egypt and Horus as invariably that of Low-er Egyqjt. The 

' Sethe, Dramnliffhf Teite. 23 ff, » /tm. Sm, xvii, jig, wth pi. i. 

* Gautier St J^uicr. Faatflrt * Uchl^ pp, 33 ft.; see tiw Bordundt, Statuen und Suituetttn (CCG>, ll, 
pp. 2x where somt of the iceim are shown in photognph. 


epithets of the gods are not always the same* On all five statues (seven cases m all) 
Seth is connected with 'T® ‘Ombos*, and on four of the five (six cases) Horus 
receives the epithet BkdH -fiehdetite’, e,g* pi. Hi, i. By way of vanation, Seth 
is twice po nb Sw 'lord of Su’. this being the already mentioned town lying just 
within the borders of Upper Egj-pt. Similarly Horus is once Mjn‘lord of 

Mesen’, a Lower Egyptian town near Ttrw ‘Sile’ on the eastern froi^tier * 

But there are also direct references to Upper and Lower Egypt: on one statue Seth 
is called ‘lord of the Upper Egyptian land'; on another (pi. ill, a) his figure is 
replaced bv that of Upper Egypt personified, the accompanying legend stating ‘Seth 
gives to thee his places’, while corresponding figure of Lower Egypt as lepnd 
‘Horus gives to thee his thrones’; a third statue describes Seth as ‘pre¬ 
eminent in the Upper Egyptian conclave’* and Horus as ‘pre-eminent In the 

Lower Egyptian conclave’. In at first sight glaring contradiction to all the forcing 
testimony is one single scene in which Horus, though holding the plant of Lower 
Egypt and facing Seth ( 1 + 1=1 JS 'who is in Ombos’. nevertheless receives the qiithet 
‘th<^ Behdetite pre-eminent in the Upper Egyptian conclave 

How does Kees face up to this so nearly unanimous body of evidence? He assur^ 
us that with the partner of Seth some degree of hesitancy {eine geuisse Umicherfmi, 
i, o) is observable. In other words he ignores the great bulk of the facts and attaches 
exaggerated importance to the one small detail that might seem to favour is own 
opinion. In that exceptional instance, he tells us, the god is clearly understood as 
Horus of Edfu UeutUch ats Horvs von Edfu aufgefasst). In thb verdict there may be 
a grain of truth, but only a grain. ‘Preleminent m the Upper Egyptian ^nclave is 
not a mistake on the part of designer or sculptor, as I myself once thought m agree^ 
mentwith Sethe,^ for it occurs even earlier as an epithet of Horus the Behdetite, ^It 
must be remembered that Horus was the conqueror of his brother Seth, and for that 
reason might comprehensibly annex his attributes; otherwise said, our yithet may 
well signify ‘the falcon-god of Lower Egyptian Befidet who has extended his power 
abo over the divine concbve of Upper Egypt’. In that case there would be no direct 
reference to Edfu, the Upper Egyptian Behdet, though any ancient E^tian who 
knew that the Lower Egyptian god had secondarily established himself m that town 

might easily have constru^ the epithet in that way. ^ 

Before going farther I must animadvert upon the dangers of question-begging 
translation. Kees sometimes renders Bhdti as *von Edfu’ (i, 23. 28. 29, &c.), though 
aMnetimes, to do him justice, he writes ‘Horus BM-f (e.g. I, Z 2 > sod somerimes von 
Bkd I (Edfu)* e.g. I, 14- Upon mcautious readers the firet-named transmtion can 
hardly fail to’exert a hypnotic effect. Doubtless it is often useful to write 'lord of 

« JBA V 141' 9 pirticulfirly dear rtample Chasainat, Bd/ou {henceforth quoied as Ch., Ed.), VU S* - 
Na. XIV; wo bdtw', p. +9. n. Tbira other places of tho same n^e. includms Mfu^o 
name was secondarily mtnsfctmi in the same way as Bobdet, but the easterly Mesco near Sile was clearly tlw 

most important. S« too Gsulhier, Ditt. gSogr. m, 60. _ . -1. r 1. « ■._* tj*, *k. 

* S« below, p. zjj for an esplariatiofi of this difficult term. F*r the present epithet cf. pufi ttrt (del. 

Upper Egyptian sanctuary) given to Nhti 'tlie Ombste\ Pyr. 370. ^ ^ If* 

4 Jiquic^ d* P.pi 11 (henceforth quo«d as }iq., IJ), n, pi 51- Also another 

example from the reign of Seawtris I, Ann, Senr., XXX, pi, II to Chevrier's srtide, lop nght. 

Plate HI 



1, 2. Reliefs ffXim the sides of the thrones in sitting statues of i^esoslrvs 1 from Lisht. 

3, 4. Reliefs of the reign of King Djoscr (Tliirti Dynasty) from the Step Pyramid at Sak^rah^ 

Plate IV 

Duorvvay of Scso$tri» t from ihe temple of MedlmaJ. 


Thebes' for ^ nb Wfst and so forth, but wherever there Is the shadow of a doubt, 
it is definitely unscientific to insinuate unproven identifications. To render old 
^Syptisn dates with the Greek month-names Thoth, Pachons (mostly thus, moreover, 
with spurious or inferior forms) is, to say the least, anachronistic^ and so too it is to 
use the Greek designations of the nomes in place of the old Egyptian—Oryx nome. 
Hare nome, are far superior renderings. 

I do not propose to follow up Kees’s arguments point by point, and shall now turn 
to some related scenes of great intrinsic interest that deserve consideration because 
they confirm Sethe’s interpretation of the scene in the funerary temple of Sahuret 
and also in other ways beiu upon the problem of the Behdetite. By way of introduc¬ 
tion, however, some attention must be paid to the word itrt, in rendering which 

above as ‘conclave* I have confessedly sacrificed accuracy to intelligibility. The 
accepted translation is ‘sanctuary’,' but this I hold to be altogether wide of the mark. 
In its religious application the term seems so much bound up with the great royal 
Sed-festival or Jubilee that no single English word could possibly convey an adequate 
notion of its signification. I believe iirt to be related to itrm ‘river’, ‘river-channel' 
and to fundamentally something like ‘line’ or ‘row’. Occurring frequently in 

the dual, it there means ‘the two sides' or 'rows’. Now in the Sed-festival, which was 
normally celebrated at Memphis, all the deities of the tw o halves of the country' were 
summoned thither, their statues or emblems being housed in two row's of shrines on 
opposite sides of a vast Jubilee court,- the Lower Egyptian shrines with the appearance 
I of the primitive sanctuaries of the cobra-goddess W/dyi ‘Edjo’ at Buto, 
while the Upper Egyptian shrines resembled that of the vulture-goddess Nekhbet 
at El-Kab.i Since, as the legend of Horus shows, the North was deemed to have 

e * 1 :^’ »he a<;cotnpan>-in£ remark UrsprSngbeb teoftt Paltui dni KSttigi is due to 

S«the s irusMien theory of the Pr-mr, Pr-mr, see below, n. j. 

» On tbw M-itf -JubiJec mMisioiu’ see Bissinfc & Keea, Unlfrsothuttgt?, nu dtn Rtiif/s atu dtm JJf- 
dff Pathuw, I 14 ff,; m new exampk confinning that these were situated m Memphis, P. lynbeur, 

1 ni’ ! .u 'he Sed-festival at Memphis, s«, t«. yEA v, ,91 ff, 

^t the hsrbsnc lookmg ,tructu«, determined with these signs were primiti.^ temples or shrines not 
royal palaces os mamtsincd by Seihe, Urges^hkhtf, p. 130, n. a, is eonelusively proved, ngt only by the Metmo 
smne (Pr^rsr. 3, i; JV-nw, a, a; Pr-Kr, w. 3. i). but also by epithets of the two goddesses who we« 
their possessor,. For the two ahntiea of ihe wbra-goddess Edja (vulgo Bum. see beigw. p. 35), both of them 

having the shape ®, cf. ^ ° 1Y8 I of Dep and of Pe. Udy of the Per-nu and lady of the 

Per-i^cr’, Bon:h.,&j^,,i,p. sa.fig.sS; Jdq.,ffepi//. ll.pL tS, much damaged. Ir has been customary massume 
that Per-nu wd Per-neswr were alternative names fisr one and the same building, hut the title just quoted 
proves t^t this was not so; Sethe, op. cii., p. 145. n. ,, declared the Dopptha^igMAt to be very striking end 
suited that the one name onginated in Damanhur or Heliopolis, and the other in Bum. but the namral 
inferen« from the title of Edjfi abgvic is that the Per-nu belonj^cd to Dep. and the Per-neier to Pc or vice 
^rsa; Pie and Dep, as Mt forth rather mote hrUy below, p, 55, were the two adjoining early settlements w hfrh 
toother et^sntuted the Delta town of Duto, the modem Tell el-Fera'Tn, Similarly the Upper Egyptian 
vulture-goddcM Nekhbet of El-Kib had two ah lines, the Per-wSr ‘Great House* and the NetjH-shemae 
Sanctuafy’, but of these only the bcTtcr-known, the Per-w^r, had the shape in, cf. 1 I S 
hT ^ ^ \STiite one of Ni^khcn, lady of the Nei^n'shcnfia-r and lady of the Per-wer", 

Botch., Sa^., ir. pi, iS. completed by op. cit„ t, p. 32. fig- see too Sethe in the Te*t-t^lume, p. 94, with the 
references, p. 84, n. 3. for the iVfrf-foy: the wotd fVpj‘divine’ ( Wb. u, 364. 26) would alone suffiee to show that 

", ^ "7. A. A, o, aptly quoted by 

bethe, IV. tS^, belong to officials connected with the Per-wer, and from th^ 


prevailed over the South, the Upper Egyptian ‘row of shrines’ might m writmg be 
referred to by though the more precise form was determinative 

tl- In effect, the expression tirt Smft would thus mean ‘the company or conclave of 
Upper Egyptian deities’, though simultaneously it would conjure up the image of 
a row of tipper Egyptian shrines such as could be seen at Memphis on the occasion 
of the great national We shall find these rows of shrines in the scenes now 

to be discussed, and excavation has actually unearthed imitations of them m the 
mar.xllous temple attached to King Djoser’s Step Pyramid.' 

The scene in the temple of Sahure* where Sethe discovered his Lower Egyptian 
Behdetite is so fragmentary' that it is little wonder neither he nor Borchardt recognized 
it as referring to the Sed-festh-al. This, however, is proved by the rather le^ frag¬ 
mentary and closely similar scenes in the funerary temple of Phiops II, which again 
form a link between Sahure<’s representations and those in the well-known Festival 
Hail of Osorkon at Bubastis.* Since in both these later temple chance has destroyed 
the image of Homs the Behdetite, which was doubtless once present, a somewhat 
detailed analysis appears necessary'; the particular point I desire to make is that m all 
these pictures the Upper and Lower Egyptian deities are kept strictly apai% so that 
there is no doubt whatever that Sethe's Behdetite was a demzen of Lower E^pt, ^ 
indeed all the shrines | on the same wall clearly indicate. In the temple of Phiops II 
the east and west walls of what Jiquier terms the Antechamber are occupied by reliefs 
depicting separately the divinities of the two halves of the kingdom.^ On the west 
wail w e see the king standing and facing towards the right; the doorway m the east wall 
has prevented a corresponding representation there. Each wall exhibits five registere, 
the upper three showing standing deities looking tow ards the king or, on the east wall, 
deemed to be so looking. Before each row an officiant pronounc^ the formula of 
offering, and the deities in return address the king with the comforting a^urance that 
they bring him all good things in order that he may govern the living, being arisen on 
the*throne of Homs (cf. here pi. iv, the vertical lines). In the fourth register serv ants 

Seth^ withsmina probabJUty. wnduded that th* Per-wfr sittisted « El-Klbj ^tether the 

Ateojnd shrine oft the same site, w whether it was at Nekhen (HieraconpoLs). directly aemss the nver. 

tsb. Sec further fer the 

tiona Uuer P\Tttmidt A pis. lv ff. with the tcKt, pp. i jo ff. The contTMted btiildm^ are here, however, 

considerably altered end stylijcd; Laucr ia wrong in supposing, with Moret. that they have luiything to do 
with eastern and western confcderatioiis of Delta names (op. cit., p- 130)- He swna nght, howler, m t^^ 
them to be not the actual buildings used in the Sed-fcatival. hut only copic*. It would seem likely that th 
ceremony was always, or nearly always^, celebrated in the actual town of Memphis; an apparent excepaon, 

1««r pis. 7. ». *=■ the phoiogrephs. pi*. 3a. 3 +- 

the relative poaitio™. In this late temple one or two Lower Egyptian god* have by some error streyed into 
the Upper Egyptian scries, and vice vena, but not enough to upset the statement abavt:.^^ 

> P^pi II. ii. pis. so-S. PP‘ 39 ff.. west wall, Upper Egyptian ; pb. 5S-60, with pp. 49 

east w Jl, Lower Egyptian ^PP'^' Egyptian seeuon seems oomplei^ 

where we see Seth of So, Khnum of Hcrmopolia Magna, and Mont, presumably of The^, but here, per^ps 
soWy from Isdt of spaee, the significant shrines are omitted- The north wall. pis. 54 ff-, smulwly eomplet« 
the Lower Egyptian reries, hut here none of the god* is tecogniable. apart fiom the Lower Ei^nan souk 
(tJwO of Horti and Seth, on which the remarks by J^quicr, op. cit., pp. 4S f., and others by Sethe as quoted 
by him tn worthy ^ ittcndon- 


are seen slaughtering oxen, and in the fifth courtiers approach to pay hotnage. In 
front of each deity on the west wall is a typical Upper Egyptian on the east wall 
this is replaced by |, exactly as in the temple of Sa^iure*/ The losses in both walb 
have been great, but on the east side far greater than on the western. Here at all events 
we can still discern Min (of Coptus or Panopolis), Seth (presumably of Ombos), the 
dog-headed Spirits of Hieiaconpolls and some cynocephalous apes doubtless belonging 
to Hermopoiis Magna; as first figure of the third register there stood a goddess whose 
legend Jequier has shrewdly restored as that of Nekhbet of Eiljihyiaspolb (E|-Kab).‘ 
The presence of Seth among these Upper Egy-ptian divinities leads us to expect Horus 
the Behdetite on the opposite wall, and there in fact we do see one falcon-headed 
deity, whom, however. Jequier supposes to have been one of the Spirits of Buto, 
That Horus the Behdetite did occur somewhere on this wall seems guaranteed by the 
scene in the temple of Sahuref, the more so since there, as also here, the barber-god 
occurs, emphasizing the close relationship between these scenes in the 
two temples. That relationship becomes the more apparent because the presence of 
Lkvt-^r among I^ower Egyptian deities is unexpected and unexplained, the same 
being true of the first of his neighbours in the temple of Phiops, namely 
The second neighbour, however, another rare god called Hpid{}) or Hphp{})* 

* Op. CiTr, p. 42. 

" Since my article Periomfieation {EgyptiaH} in Hestinfis’i i’w. of Rtl and Etkift ii not accessible to all 
EgypteJogists, I repeat what I wrote there on this topic; ‘Dua'-wer 'the great^ Mcming-Gtia- is depicted in 
human form (Botch., Sa^., it, p(, t^). His name U written with the aymbol and Sethe has shmvn (Text, 
ad foe., p. 97) that he is nothing more nor less than the royal heard personified. In the PiTHmid Texts (1329] 
1428, lopj) his name is associated, not only with the act of shaving, but also with other incidents in the motning 
toiiet-^.g. fsce.viwhing—and the royal barber appears to have been called "pR«t of Dua’-wer”.' For this 
last title see Mar., Aforf,. 366, a airihin$ example. Sec, too, Blacitman's «luablc no\e,jlEA xxi, 4. n. 4. 

> For the word-formation see Sethe, OntenurAiwgeif, V, t47, where the rendering Htmchethindt is proposed. 
IVb. Ill, (75. 13, gives jA|t^ without meaning immediately after the deity of the same name, both from texts 
of Grae«>.Roman date. Brugsch, B'A $uppt„ 855, qtiotes an example of the deity, erroneously connecting 
him with the snaiing of birds. The object is written If j| in Pyr. 452, where the context throws no light on its 
Mtum, but Sethe in his commentary concludes from the determinative that it formed pan of the royal insifinJa 
It IS s^Bc that the 'bacltland^pilw) of the Vlllth Upper Egyptian nome should bear the some name ffAt-f 
(with ft , s« Gauthier, JJicf. gtbgr., iv. 43. where the example, Uyden V3, should be read tmt and eliminated) 
bur this can hardJy bt urged aa cn'denct that (Ifyt-i was an Upper Egyprian Rod, 

" Jrftjuicr (op. cit., p. 5t) has moognized that the name has something to do with the Two fans, but docs not 
suggest a pemonification. Despite the later writing 'fn the reading^fpAp seems less probable than (Ipai, 
a possibili ry weiRhed also by Blackman. For the full reduplication (sec H 'h. 1 n, 71 , 3) J found for 

A’Stej in 393 might be quoted, though there ^ is not ideognphie, but phonetic. The only exact analogy 
appears to be 1 J J, later variant IJ 1 J*. the name of the XIXth nome of Upper Eg^-pt (Gauthier, op. cit,. 
t. *75), hut there the reading is unfominately unknown, Kees, G 5 fi. i^'arhr., 1934, toy. having disproved 
the thjtherto accepted reading see too Wb. 1, 231, 7. it can barely be doubted that the phonetic 

CMWplement 0 here strangely added to the ideogram “j* was intended (n distinguish its pronunciation from that 
'shade': the component consonants bp were known already to Hrogseh, IVb, Suppf., 812 ff.- 
Diei. giSjgT. 494,1233, see too loe. cit. Ibid, mention is made of an example of the god in a New Kingdom 
magical text, but this I have been unable to trace. However, a calendar of lucky and unlucky days at Turin 
(copy by Botti in possession of Ctmf), names a festival of f «i 4tJi month of Inundation, days 6, 9. 

proximity to one another of the deities and ^f/ud( f) not only here, but also in Naville, Ftftival-Hatl 

pi. ta, speaks strongly in favour of the connexion with the tvio fans, as suggested in the test; nor would 


is shown to have Lower Egyptian connexions by the fact that there existed a seldom- 
mentioned Delta town bearing the same name.* The two gods and HpTvi{ ?), 

who must be conjectured to be personifications or patrons respectively of the king’s 
handkerchief, towel, or the like and of the two fans habitually seen following him, are 
found together also among the Lower Egyptian divinities in the Bubastis scenes, so 
that there can be but little doubt in which half of the country’ they were held in honour.^ 
It is unfortunate that no better-known deity of Lower Egypt has survived the destruc¬ 
tion of Phiops’ east wall, but the human-headed Tkmd ‘He of Tjehnu’ (Libya) 
points to the north;* it is idle to speculate whether he was identical with ‘Ash (/I), 
lord of Tjehnu’ found in another part of the temple of Sahure': or whether he is to be 
equated with the 'Horus of Tjehnu’ who appears in the Bubastite scenes. 

These latter scenes help to elucidate those in the two Old Kingdom temples. At 
Bubastis the Lower Egyptian gods occupy one long row of their own, a regular itrt in 
the sense above defined. Also they are inside their shrines instead of standing behind 
them, and in front of each deity is a tiny figure of the king making an oblation, showing 
that either he or his representative visited each shrine in turn. Above all. the reliefs 
of Osorkon prove that the occasion for these ceremonies was the Sed-festival, though 
the mention of ?If^ ‘the first day of the year’, i.e. the first day of the first month of 
winter, on the west w’all of Phiops would of itself have been decisive."* 

I turn now’ to certain other pictures w'hich refer either to the same episode in the 
Jubilee proceedings or to one closely akin. Egyptologists will recollect the fragmentary 
lintel from the Theban temple of Amenophis 1 which Spiegelberg first published,* 
which Winlock^ next, in collaboration with Lindsley F. Hall, sought to apportion 

so unccmunon a $igft ^ Dccuired in the writing, were this not so. The duality i$ naturally due to that 
of the two Egyptian kingdoms, the same notion being apparent also in ftpd ‘esctiemity’ <of the land) and in 

the iip|.crowna (IE6, in. 69, 12-6), ^ , 

* Overlooked by Gauthier, but recorded by Bnigsch, Dift, g^ogr., 49+, quotations oomc from two late 

Sarcophagi: Petekhons, whose saroophagua is said to come from Sakkarah, was a t»/ of Mut of Ashru, 
and also W Mut and Khons of the temple of ?)', Roug^, Imcr. hi/t., loa; the other aarcoplMgus, said to 
be in Vienna and belonging to one Tjaharpto (Biogsch, Gtogr. frtsiht., ill, pi, 14, Nos, 49 ff, w'ith pp, 34 f.. 
but see also Gauthier, Livre dtt Rou, III, tyi. n. 3) mentions many Upper Egyptian priesthoods, particularly 
in Hermonthis. but in die contest that concern* us the priesthood of 'Min residing mf)' is 

sandwiched between that of Hathflr, lady of Wvb, and that of Amen-Rc^, lord of the North Land’; yitb&r. 
lady of W>r)t, had her place of ^rship in the Ilnd Lower Egyptian nome, Marictte, OattLfta, I, 36, d; Chassinat, 
Dtndara (henceforth quoted as Ch., Dfnd.}, I. 142, Piehl. /itfcr. Hufr., Jl. 127 (here again beside 

* 1 am indebted to Blackman for a reference to Ch,. Ed-, viil,, 137. whete the gods and 

this wrilicn ilpbp. occur beside one another in a text relating to the filUng of the udjal-eye\ they are not 
found in the very similar text, Brugseh, T 7 ifj., 41 f, 

> ^^q., Pepi //, op. cit.. pi, 60. see p. 51. with n. 7; on a fragment recognized too lale to be placed in the 
Reeonf titutiein d'lnuemAfe. pi, 5S, 

* BruRsch, TAer., nasff.; Sethe. Uttifrsuekung^H, m, 14+. under tpj nrp-f: early example in lists of 

feasts, Junker, CFao //. 60 f. In spite of Borchardt, LXXli, 92 ff, (an interesting article, but containing 
many unwarrantable conjectures) I consider it certain that the Sed-festival was reckoned officially as beginning 
or the date named, which is often mentioned a* that of the day when some high official was commanded by 
the king to ‘proclaim’ (sr) it- Important new material for the 8th to tjth Jubilees of Ramcsscs 11 , Mond & 
Mycm, TtmpUs nf Afmont, pi. 93. L 3 , vrith pp. 163 ff.; here the said date is given for four out of the six 
occasions mentioned, but for the two others the 17th of the same month is inexplicably nan^. 

» Spiegelberg, Zwti BHtr^e aur Cotkickit iwd Topographif. der Thebani$(ben NternpoHs im Ntutn Reitk* 
(1898), pis. 2-6. * JEA tv, ti ff. 


among uvo lintels even more fragmentary, but to which Sethe,’ who had access to 
Spiegelbet^’s squeezes, subsequently restored its pristine unity. Since then Bisson 
de la Roque has brought to light at .Medamud two nearly identical lintels which are 
not only of earlier date, but also are still equipped with considerable portions of their 
doorposts. I content myself here with reproducing and discussing the doorway of 
Sesostris III (pi. iv);* that of the slightly later King Amenemhet-Sebkhotpc,’ lilte 
that of Amenophis I, shows but fevv’ differences of detail, far less than are visible in 
a highly ornate descendant of the reign of Mcreoptah.* 

The bnefest examination of these doorways reveals the fact that their representations 
are mere modifications of those already studied; even the vertical line of inscription 
running down each doorpost reproduces in essentials the phrases of the horuEontal 
bands above the deities in the temple of Phiops, The more restricted space here has 
forced the artist to concentrate on Upper Egyptian cults, these being chosen because 
his main purpose was to include the gods of Medamud and of Thebes. That there was 
no intention to exclude Lower Egypt is proved by the presence of the heron-god of 
Djebatet (top right) and of Horus the Behdetitc himself; Sethe® has shown that Djeba^et 
was either another name of Pc (Buto), or else was quite close to it, and this very 
ancient divinized bird was doubtless incorporated in the pictures as the appropriate 
counterpan of Homs the Hieraconpolite (Nhni, top left), whereas the cobra-goddess 
Edjo of Buto would have produced a very incongruous effect. But a still more curious 
means was devised to remind the spectator that the Lower Egyptian deities had their 
share in the ceremonial here commemorated: though all the divinities depicted in the 
separate square compartments are Upper Egyptian, behind those on the left doorpost 
are Lower Egj'ptian shrines this reminds us how imaginatively and unliterally 
we have to interpret alt such pictures. On the left doorpost of Sesostris 111 w'c see 
Amun of Thebes, (Min) of Panopolis,? Suchus of Imiotru {part of Gebelen) and his 
close neighbour Anubis of the Two Egg-shells,* i.e. of the two rocks composing 
Gebelen (‘the two mountains’); on the right beside ‘Mont, the lord of Thebes, residing 
in Madu’ (Medamud) only Satis of Elephantine and (Khnum) of Hermopolis Magna 
remain. It is in the central scene of the lintel that the greatest innovations have been 
made, and here the balance and rhythm of the design cannot but fill us with admiration. 
In this vignette we see the culmination of the entire festival—the monarch seated 
high upon the dais in his robes of states, on one side as ruler of Upper, and on the other 

' Dttt yubilaunaliild aut dm Tottniempd AmertopkU /, in AwAr, 1921, 31 ft. 

* Cunicvidlle-Gifaudcl. Ltt monumaitt du moym anpire. pi. i, b FouHfts dt MAlujnifud I tm 

indebted » Miss Broome tor dnwmj^ parts of this plate afresh and placing some of the block* in iheir proper 
positions. To her aUo are due most of the other drawings in my plates, as well as the sketch-map 

^ Op. cit., pi. 5. 

* Peme, Palaft 0/ Aprirt, p|. ai. For an inaccuiate and wrongheaded discussion of this, together with the 

linteJ of Amenophis I, see Kees, 1. 12 f. j } 170. 

* The Upper %yptian shrines on the right-hand doorpost have not the norrnal broad shape of the Pr-isir 
but a namiwcr form not very diJIcrent from that seen in the temple of Phiops I [. 

^ publication, emend , thoiigh possibly the nuBlahe is in the originaJ, See Cottevieille- 

GImudet, op, ciL, pL 5* 

* S« ZAS 15G ff.t and my Ancimi E^^tian OnQmnitkSf undtf No*. 317-9^ of On. Am. 


side as ruler of Lower, Egypt. To the king of Lower Egypt Horus the Befidetite 
fittingly presents notched ribs of palm symboUidng millions of years, and to the King 
of Upper Egypt Seth of Ombos makes a similar gift. The point to be driven home 
is that these larger and so dissimilarly conceived deities are given special pro¬ 
minence not bet^use they are not local divinities like the rest, but because they are 
that and something more as w^ell, namely the acknowledged representative of Upper 
and Lower Egypt respectively.' 

There is one other highly interestbg feature in these doorways to which I shall call 
attention at a later stage (p. 51), but I must now pass on to another far more ancient 
scene with which Kees thought to deal Sethe’s theory the coup de graced This occurs 
on a stela in an underground chamber of the Step Pyramid, one of a set of three which 
correspond to another set of three in what Firth, the discoverer, termed the South 
Tomb. In all six cases King Djoser is depicted upright, the only human form that 
has been admitted. Thrice he is shown striding rapidly forward, thrice standing at 
rest. The two stelae that alone concern us are the northernmost under the pyramid 
{pi. ][], 4)^ and the central one in the South Tomb (pi, iii, 3}'* The brief inscription 
in 4 is rendered by Kees ‘Halting (in) the temple of Horus of Behdet (Edfu)’, and that 
in 3 ‘Halting in the temple of the falcon-god of //»f (Lctopolis)’.* 104 the king w'ears 
the crown of Upper Eg)pt, and the ideographically written word which Kees translates 
‘temple’ {Heiligtum )—I should prefer the humbler ‘shrine’ ^hows the form 

in 3 the Lower Egyptian crown is worn, and the edifice depicted b the Low'er 
E^tian |. It seems very probable that these scenes illustrate the same episode of 
the Sed-festival as the reliefs of Sahure< and Phiops 11 . But here there b an important 
difference, and I see no means of evading the conclusion drawn by Kees: Horus the 
Be^detitc being accompanied by the Upper Egyptian type of shrine must really be the 
god of Edfu. But does thb in any way imperil the already established fact that the 
home of Horus the Behdetitc lay in the Delta? Clearly not I All that thb stela proves 
is that Horus the Behdeiite had found a new cult-centre at Edfu as early as the Third 
Dynasty. It must be carefully observed that Horus the Behdetite b not here presented 
as the national god of Upper Egj’pt, but only as a typical Upper Egyptian deity. The 
parallel depiction of Horus of Letopolb confirms thb judgement, since Hm, though 
mentioned a number of times in the Pyramid Texts,* never was, and has never been 
claimed as, a Lower Egyptbn capital. 

Among the pitiably broken and cryptic reliefs of the Sed-festival in the Sun-temple 
of Neuserre^ there b again an example of Horus the Behdetite in company wi^ the 
Upper Egyptian shrine.? What makes yet more sure the conclusion that this too 

■ On the Ibitel cf Atntnophia Seth of Ombo* (that near yolth, not that near Elephuidne, which would have 
been written J »«• however. Sethe, Urgticidfhte, p. 72. top) i* repeated humiui-hcadcd in one of the 
wniill compartmenta on the right; I can only view this as a jamewhat anomalous duplication of the central 
depiction of an anunaUc Seth. The discussion by Kees (l. 13) is excusably at fault because he could not kirnw 
that all the gods of the small cornpartmentB were Upper Egyptian. 

* Kees, Zu den neuen Z^et-Reliefs am Sakknret in Nadfr. Gottinsen, 1929, S 7 ff- 

i Firth & Quibell, Step Pyramid, TI, pi, 17, * PP- P*‘ ■*«- 

* For this town, the modem Aualm. see Gauthier, Diet, gCogr., IV, 173. 

* E.g. Pyr. 419. 810, in all ten times. ? Bissing & Kees, Dai Re~Hedigtum, ii, pi. 19- 


figures the Horus of Edfu is the fact that the approaching king is carried on a throne 
in the bowl- or baskct-like receptacle called the which is known to 

have been characteristic of Upper Egypt.’ Thus we now have reached the position 
that as early as the Third Dynasty the Lower Egyptian god Horus the Bebdetite had 
already been introduced, local epithet and all, to Upper Egyptian Edfu, which accord¬ 
ingly became a second Behdet. We shall find this duplication of Behdet to have 
exercised an important effect upon the later name of the more northerly of the pair, 
and also to have influenced its southern counterpart in the choice of a symbol under 
which to represent its god. We must never forget, however, that the original Behdet 
was the Behdet of the Delta; to that fact the constant contrasting of Horus the 
Behdetite with Seth of Ombos bears eloquent and irrefragable witness, 

II, Befjidet QS a town, □ome, and district of Lower Egypt 

A Lower Egyptian town Behdet did really exist, and is no mere deduction from the 
epithet of the god. Attention was called to the decisive evidence by Borchardt* as 
early as 1906, but for more or less comprehensible reasons w'as overlooked by Sethe 
and Kees. A fascinatingly interesting inscription at Edfu,^ of which the first and most 
important lines were published and translated by Brugsch, Thesaitrus, pp. 604 ff., gives 
detailed statistics of the dimensions of Egypt, and indicates as its total length 106 Ur 
or schoeni. This figure is repeated in the charred geographical papyrus from Tanis,* 
with a further dimension of 2.0 itr in which the town of is somehow' involved. The 
complete elucidation of these data w'as afforded by some votive cubits found at 
Kamak, the gist of which rvas announced by Borchardt in the afore-mentioned note, 
though he did not publish the actual inscriptions until much la ter.^ It will suffice to 
reproduce here the crucial words from the best preserved of the three; this dates from 
the reign of Nekhtharbebe: 

Sum-total® of schoeni, to6, complete. Mode of calculating it;^ Elephantine to Pi-Hapy, S6 
schoeni; from upstieam at PUHapy to the hinterland of Behdet, 20 schoeni. 

The necessary emendation of the second figure to | ^ and the interpretation of 
Si as ^ pAtr ‘hinterland’, are taken from the less complete cubit dating from one of the 
Osorkons.* Pi-Ha<py is now known to be. not the island of Rddah opposite Old Cairo, 

^ Seilic. UrgtKhfehie^ § 150. 

* BorcliflTdtk utuI Nihiandsntarkfn, La 190^1 5 +r 3 * 

i Ch.^ Ed.j vip sMp L Sflc also Porter & Mass, Bihliagraphy^ VI, 164, imdcr 

* GrifBlh Petrie, Two Ptipyri from Tanij^ pi 9, fr, 9, 

* In phoiograph, Borcliw^it> drr pJ. 11^ No. l; then in type in F^tluhrift to C. F. 

Lthmamt-Haupls Gfhvrtilag = JanuSt Vienna Sc Leipzig, 19^1 > pt. ir9 ff. 

* Dm 4 sntj, see Wb. V, 458, 1* and for the writing op. eit., v, 463, bottofo, in a name of the aim-god^ 
cf. further in the Edfu inscription quoted in n. 3, ibid. Since the above wa* written h I have received from 
Cem^ a copy of the three repsten of figum below the in^mption above rcpitHluccdi and here, too, I find 

a mo^t Bsbonishing writing for Dyn. Xlt. 

^ Sim also on the monument of Scsoems 1 quoted below, not in fFfc., hut evicltnlly related to the 

mathenwtica] um of simt. which Griffith traiuldtcd ‘working oui*, vx P«t, Rhind Malfieimtical Pap^rm, 
P- * Bflrehaidt, Zeitmfmtvg, p|, n. No. a. Also Ln the artiels quoted above in n. 5. 



but Atar en-Naby on the east bank 2 km. farther south,’ and Behdct, which fiorchardt 
identified w*ith Damanhur, wilt prove to be — elsew'here. Obviously the compiler of 
these figures set before himself the task of stating the lengths of the Upper and Lower 
Egyptian Niles respectively, and the total length of 86-r20 — Jo6 schoeni from 
Elephantine to the sea led Borchardt to assess the length of the schoenus at 20,000 
cubits or 10-5 km. The age of the original source from which were derived these 
numbers and the other indications of area and so forth that accompanied them was 
hardly, until recently, susceptible of a reasoned estimate. The language of the cubits 
seemed Middle Egyptian, but statistics of such precision appeared to demand an 
advanced and sophisticated state of society. Through the generosity of a French 
colleague I am able to submit the proof that the archetype of the cubits went back to 
the Twelfth Dynasty at all events. In preparing my commentary on the Gol^nischeff 
Onomasticon, 1 applied to M. Lacau for information concerning the newly reconstructed 
Chapel of Sesostris I at Kamak.^ In July 1938 he kindly sent me a hand-copy of all 
the essential inscriptions, together with valuable comments and permission to use 
these data for my geographical researches. Annexed is his copy, reoopied for me by 
Mrs. Smither, of the portion immediately adjoining the Lower Egyptian nome-list. 

0 1 M 

1 1 t ak 




n| 0 Ail ^ 

1 Kellis© 

AO Sf ! 

1 ^,?, 

h ^ 

Ftc. I. 

It did not escape M. Lacau, nor could it have escaped any expert m possession of the 
facts, that the text here, very baffling in some of its details, is closely akin to that of the 
cubits. The rare expression p sBn hi (see p. 33, n. 7 above) would alone suffice 
to prove the relationship. The divbion of the Nile from Elephantine to the Mediter¬ 
ranean is the same, and again we find hinterland of Behdet'. 

It Is true that the figures in the copy furnished by M. Lacau are not concerned with 
the length of Egypt, but with other measurements. Beloiv these figures, however, are 
others not available to me for publication, and there cannot be any doubt but that all 
these statistics belong to the same series. Nor is it to be supposed that with the Kamak 
chapel we are at the beginning of the stoiy'; that presumably belongis to the Old Kingdom. 

^ M. in Anft^ Strr. xxxviip 233 ft., and see also my Ancient Egyptian Onomoitiea, iind^r Na, 397 

of On. Am. 

* For a prelimmiiiy account set Serv, 567 with itopfiesaive photognphs of the facade 

and ont alde^ 



Where then is this Behdet now authenticated as existing in the Delta at an early 
stage of Egyptian history? Sethe, as we have seen, placed it at Damanhur,* but his 
only evidence came from one of those series of supplementarv districts which the 
Graeco-Roman temples occasionally appended to their nome-lists and which Brugsch 
used to describe as districts aiitonomes. Since in the sequel we shall have much to do 
with such lists of nomes and districts, a few' lines may filly be devoted to their normal 
mode of presentation. To refer to them as nomc-lists is a convenient, but strictly an 
inaccurate^ appeUation, since they consist of long processions of large-breasted, 
fecund human figures in relief, each figure laden with offerings and bearing on his or 
her head a standard upon which hieroglyphs indicate the name of the nome or district 
personified. The king stands in front presenting them in turn to the chief deity of 
the temple in which the sculptures occur. The legend accompanying each separate 
offering-bearer declares: ‘King so-and-so has come, he brings to thee nomc-capital X 
and/or town Y with offerings Z; thou arthere naming a deity closely associ¬ 
ated with the nome or district in question, often however in allusive terms. The 
upshot of this procedure is to identify every local deity w'lth every other, cf. a parti¬ 
cularly striking scene w'here all the gods of the different nomes are depicted as crocodiles 
and thus identified with Suchus, the god of the Fayyum.^ Only in one respect is such 
identification limited, namely in respect of sex; at Denderah, where the deity w'as the 
goddess Hathor, all the identification clauses identify her with some other goddess, 
To return to the list which Sethe supposed to mention Damanhur, the district con¬ 
cerned is the last of a much-dam aged series at Edfu,^ embracing the whole of Egypt 
from K6m Ombo northwards, this following upon, and continuous with, a series of 
nomes of Lower Egypt. The name of the final district+ is Behdet, and the legend 
beside Its offering-bearer describes Ptolemy XI as bringing to Horus of Edfu ‘Behdet 
inundated wfith its ^-provisions, and Dnd-n-Hr Tow'n-of-Horus carrying all 

its frwifc'-provbions'; finally the god of Edfu is addressed, ‘Thou art the Behdetite 
who ranges over Chemmiss and captures the crocodile (Ap), &c’. The only 
other mentions of Dmi-n-flr in Gauthierb Dictionnairc g^gmphiqtie (vi, 93-4) are: (o) 
Dm-Hr on a topographically very important block which was long in the 
hands of an inhabitant of Ashmun, but doubtless emanated from Kom Abu Billu 
over 20 km. to the north-west, on the desert edge near the village of Et-Tarranah 
(Terenuthis) immediately w'estw'ard from the Rosetta branch; the block describes this 
particular Dmi-Hr as on ‘the shore of the Western River south of A'Iafket‘,*^ 

^ Sethelatest references to fhe question were in his p. 71 and p, 55^ n. i. 

^ Mi^-beny, Fapy^ri^ pL i&. 

^ DQmichcn, Imrhr.t I, pU 66 — Ch-, vi, 4^ C, Sec also Porter Sl Mou, op. cit.p vi, i6i| under 

(310M31 Wherever possible, I quote from Chassinat's more accurate find complete edition. 

^ See below, p. 58* where another pi:$«agc from Edfii is quoted ItKating Chemmis in the XVtlih Lower 
Eg^'pcwi ttotncr 

* SmL s%'ip *26. Neither Daresay not Gauthier iVp 127) has noticed that in this same 

inscriplion (p. 2^2) there is a mention of one of the earlier supplementary districia in the some series 

iCK Ed., 46, No. XCIU). 


which is the ancient name of Kom Abu Billu,^ and for that reason it cannot be Daman- 
hur, which is quite 70 km. farther to the north-north-west; (i) another 'Town of 
Horus’ mentioned by Gauthier w'as the birthplace of the Apis bull named on a 
stela of the 6th year of Ptolemy VII Euergetes 11 the relevant words as given by 
Brugsch ‘the 

town Pdamenhur {Pf-dmi-n-Hr) which is within the nome of Iyet{ ?) to the west of 
the Great River’; the problem of the Great River is not completely settled, but it 
seems likely to have been the Miyas ne>rafi 6 s of Ptolemy, which is supposed to have 
debouched in the Canopic Month;* the town has always been a puzzle, but I 

believe myself able to offer an explanation which, if not absolutely certain, has a high 
degree of plausibilitj'; an alternative name of the ancient Hm, the later Letopolis and 
the modern Ausim (above, p. 32), w'as var. ’fyt *Iyet’/ and for this 

is once written in an Edfu nomc-list;* there can be no doubt that ^ here stands 
for a sign constantly confused with j owing to the similarity in hieratic;* now what 
^ holds in his upraised hand may w'ell be )( and if so, the sign is clearly equivalent to 
so that our town would undoubtedly be Letopolis, where it is well known that 
Har-merti, a form of Horus, W'as w'orshipped; Ausim might easily, therefore, 
be described as ’the tow'n of Horus’ and as lying in the Hnd Lower Egyptian nome to 
the west of the ‘Great River’. Note in this connexion that in the great Edfu nome-list 
the ‘Great River’ is given as the ‘river’ of the Ilnd Lower Egyptian nome.^ 

Thus w e have found one certain, and one probable, example of a Dttti-Hr or Dmi-n- 
Hr which is not the modern Damanhiir, and indeed there seems no reason why the 
term ‘Town of Horus’ should not, on occasion, have been used for any town where 
Horus was, or once had been, w'orshipped. Consequently, we shall be well advised 
to inquire further whether Sethe’s solitary piece of evidence in favour of Damanhur 
justifies the conclusion which he drew from it. 

The whole question of the supplementaiy^ districts is w rapt in obscurity. Brugsch 
seems nowhere explicitly to have vindicated his designation ^districts autonomes’y which 
was perhaps mainly an inference from the fact that the first of them, f=ij Nb{yi) 
‘Ombos’, i.e. Kom Ombo, appears in Greek as ‘the Ombite nome*, possibly 

being split off from the first nome of Upper Egypt named by the Egyptians ^ Ty-a/f 
‘Nubian land' and by the Greeks o rrcpl koI Gauthier, who has 

discussed the general question more fully than any other scholar,® thinks the differentia¬ 
tion of these supplementary districts attributable to fiscal reasons. Until clearer 
evidence is forthcoming, I for my part incline to regard them as mere figments of the 
priestly imagination, based largely upon mythological ratiocinations. They apparently 

* Prov-cd by blodta foiifid oii the spot by Griflithp see his Antiquitifi of Ttil tl YohuSyih, pp. 6 o ff. These 
are not mentioned by G:ALithierH op. ctt., lti+ if, who gives the cti^dii of identiftcatdon Daicssy. For the 
localities mentioned above in the text, sec my sketch-map^ pL Vj 

* ZAS Kxii, t ^5; DrVi. S7, cf, 531. My remarks here supersede those in v* 130. n, 5. 

1 See my Andtni Egypitan (Jnomattiai, under No, 407 of On* Am.; an earlier note of minCp JEA V, 130 f. 

^ GAUthierp Di^L ip 3S, J Ch.. Ed., vi, 38, under No- LIII. 

* Gardiner^ LoU-Egyptitin p. 34 a, the notes on 7, 3; 7, 6* Conversely m a writing of the town of 

E$iia, *oe my Ancimt Onomastka, under No. jsj of On. Am. f Brunch, Dki. 1369- 

■ Gauthicr^H Nottkl d"£gypt€, tl l ff., and again 113, n. ip < Op. dt., 49 ff., and especially 55, 

Pl.vh£ V 

1. Circular nome-list from a late sancophaj'us nuw t(i ihc Mcimpfiliian Museum of Art^ Vnrk. 

2 . Sketch-map of the [>eltj to show the posit ton of louns mcfitioneU in the nrtJcIc. 

Plate VI 



I. YMmci-u-d Disk and titulan- of King iiahuriSf at usp nftke sail of bb ship: rc;licf from hia pyramid-temple 
at Sakk^rah. 2 + Winged Disk and royal name from a stela of Atnmenernes ] 11 at ScrabTf c!-Kh^dim (i^inaJ). 
j. Winged Disk from above a scene in the temple of Hashepsowe at Dfir cl-BaJ^ri. 4 . Comb of the reign 
of Kinjr (First Dynasty) from Abydias. 5 , Names of King SahurE* from a column in his pyramid- 
Temple. 6. E[onjs-name of King Amcnophis II from an obelisk in the C^iro Museum. 


represent enclaves within the stereotyped series of nomes, in so far as they are not 
synonyms or duplications of those nomes themselves. Now as regards the C 3 sc here 
at issue, it must be noted that in the very same series of geographical figures ^ Behdet 
had already occurred as the name of the XVIIth nome of Lower Egypt,* that rnore 
often given as |gg Smi~bkdt 'Sambehdet'^ not only this, but the town of Sambehdet 
had been mentioned as the metropolis of a supplemeotaty district named 0 ftf, var. 

concerning which we know very little further.^ Since Sambehdet in these 
two entries is clearly one and the same place, and since gj Behdet is an acknowledged 
writing of Sambehdet (see next paragraph), we are entitled to state that Behdet is 
impUcitly involved in two separate entries of this very astonishing and perhaps entirely 
artificial procession of geographical figures. But if in two entries, why not in three? 
I am suggesting the possibility^ that the final district might be merely a thoughtless 
repetition of the XVIIth Lower Egyptian nome. Or if, as we shall see to be the more 
probable view, any definite motive lay behind its presence here at the end, it will have 
been the knowledge that Behdet was the very' last town in Eg>'pt, a fact for which 
testimony has already been produced. On this hypothesis Sethe’s supposed prototype 
of Damanhur will really be the town which later generations identified with Sambehdet. 
Further evidence on the point w'ill be offered later. 

I now return to the question of the XVIlth nome. In Ptolemaic and Roman times 
its name is mostly ^ven as Sambehdet, e.g. Ch„ Ed., iv. 35, No. LXV (Ptolemy 
VIi); Id., Mainmisi, 67 (Ptolemy X); Id., Dend. t, 127 (exact date uncertain); Dumi- 
chen, Geogr. Inschr. tv, 123 (Augustus), There w'as also, until better information came to 
hand quite recently, a possible example of this writing as early as AIc.\ander the Great, 
Brugsch, Reaieil, i, pi. 25 (=Id., Geogr. Inschr. iii, pL 4, printed from the same bIock)| 
at Luxor, where the^publications give but M. fiakir, who has examined the 
original on my behalf, states emphatically that f can never have been present, and this a 
later examination by Fairman confirmed. The many Graeco-Roman pictures of nome- 
deities regularly name only the capital town, not the nome itself, and here we almost 
invariably find Amen-R^, lord of Sambehdet, e.g. Brugsch, Tfies. 620,622. 624, 
all from Denderah;* see, too, Chassmat, Mar/imtsi, 169; Id., Ed. vt, 51. However, the 
Berlin Dictionary (i, 470, 7) registers ^ as a ‘rare variant’ {seltene yariante) for the 
nome of Sambehdet, and Kees (ii, 74, n. 3) more adventurously states the former 
to be an occasional abbreviation of the latter. But may not the truth be just the 
opposite? May not Sambehdet be, as I have already expressed it, a meaningful ex¬ 
pansion of Behdet? In order to answer this question let us review^ the facts. The 

> Ch.. E£.. VI. 41, H0. Lxvni. 

* Op. dt, VI, 46. N«. xcii. The phmierically written vacant (ChMsinat's Wjuarr brackta, here otnitled. 
mean merely that the endoaed signs are no longer preaer\'ed and haw been borrowed from earlier publica¬ 
tions) is ti^en from the legend beside the figure on whose head it the standard bearing the tree (). The deter¬ 
minative I illustrates a trait very utwal in these nome-Jists. The legends mostly assume that one name of 

capita] of the nome is the name of the nome itself, to which they consequently append * when the towm 
ia meant. Examples of this practice will be found again and again in the notne-list here under oonsideration. 

* Sec below, p. 40, and perhaps also ?) in the passage from the inscriplion of Hibis quoted on p. 45. 

* For an exceptional cate with 'Horus the Behdetite, lord of Sambehdet', see below, p. 44. 



Berlin Dicdonaiy quotes only one example in support of its statement, namely, the 
nome-list of Ptolemy X, Ch., Mammisi^ 67, where the standard on the head of the 
nome-figure has Sambchdct, while the accompanying legend has ‘He brings thee 
Behdet*,' The cases mentioned by Kees are, firstly, the standard in the Edfu 
nome-list of Ptolemy XI (above, p, 37, n. i), and secondly, that in the great Edfu 
nome-list of Ptolemy IV, Rochemonteix, Edjou I, 334 = Brugsch, Diet, g^gr.^ 1366. 
One or two less clear cases could doubtless be added from Ptolemaic times, and were 
these all, the conclusion drawn by Kees might have some plausibility. But since he 
wrote, two instances in addition to the Luxor one of the reign of Alexander mentioned 
above have come to light which place a very different complexion on the matter. 
The later of the tw'o is the unique circular nome-list represented on a sarcophagus 
now in New York and figured in ray pi. v, this is attributed by Mrs. Grant 
Williams to the Thirtieth Dynasty, but Schafer,^ who subsequently made some 
pertinent remarks on its singular appearance, placed it at about 300 B.c. Here not only 
is the XVHth nome of Lower Egy'pt wTitten ^ Behdet, but also it is the last of the 
Lower Egyptian series, and separated only by a small blank compartment from " 
Tf^Zd ‘Nubian land*, the Isi nome of Upper Egypt; no arrangement could more 
eloquently proclaim these t%vo nomes as the beginning and end of Egypt respectively, 
and one cannot fail to be reminded of the inscriptions on the cubit of Neklitharhebe 
and the reconstructed Chapel of Sesostris I. For a second piece of hitherto unused 
evidence 1 am once more indebted to M. Lacau; it is a nome-list of the joint reigns of 
Idashepsow'c and Tuthmosis HI, again from Karnak and comes from what M. Lacau 
calls the Snjieiuaire de la barque sacrie\ here too ^ appears as the XVI Ith and final 
Lower Egyptian nome, and the order of the list, so far as it is not concealed by lacunae, 
is the same as in the Chapel of Sesostris I; this identity of order* was recognized by 
M, Lacau, who indeed declared the only difference between the list of the Twelfth 
Dynasty and that of the Eighteenth to be the addition, in the Eighteenth, of a new nome, 
that of Behdet. Since the circular nome-list at New York presents the same number 
of nomes and substantially the same order,^ and since the Luxor list of Alexander 
the Great (above, p, 37), after omitting oue nome, makes Behdet its i6th and last,^ 

■ For the end of the legend S« below, p. 44, with footnolE 7, 

* BtiU. Metr. Afm.. ix (1914.), 117. ^ Schafer, Wtltgtbdadt, S7. 

-• The list ftnm the Chapel of Scsostm I baa lost Nos. 10-13, that from the S^mcluairt di la bartjuf 
fatrdt Nos. 1-2, 6-7, 15-16, but it seems fair to assume their complete identity save for the addition of the 
XVI Ith nome in the latter- If this be conceded, the differences fium the stereotyped Graeco-Roman order 
are: the early airmgEnicni (a} iranEpcHes X and XI (these Rmnan figures represent the final Gracco-Roirtan 
order), (W places the pair XV and XVI before the pair XIII, XIV, and (f) omiB Will, XlX, XX- It should 
be noted that the fired order of the Lower EpOF"™ nsjmes regular in the latest ttmes and accepted by 
Egyptologists is not found until the reign of Ptolemy VII (Ch., Ed., iv, 21 ff.>. The great Edfu nome-list, 
daring from Ptolemy IV. places XIV after XV-XVI and inverts XIX and XX ; Brugsch, Diet, gtogr., 1366, 
has most arbitrarily and misleadingly changed the order of this list as found on the actual inonument, see 
Rochemonteix, I, 3*9 ff-, with pis. 15-16. 

) The only departures from the early order are that X and XI follow otie another thus in the later fashion, 
and diat XIII is in its final position and not postponed to the i5ih place. 

* As regards the order here, there is a lacuna in the 15th place, which was presumably occupied by 
(XVI, the Mendesian). If so, XIV is the omission, and the Order is that of later times. 



it is evident that over a considerabie period seventeen was the orthodox mimbcr, 
and that the three nomes of lmt[t?)-hntt (XVIII), of 7 m/(f?)-/tA/ (XIX), 
and of Spdtc (XX) ivere later additions, perhaps not much older than Graeco- 
Roman times,' But what then of the territory subsequently occupied by these nomes, 
and what of the important towns that they contained? As ill luck will have it, w'e are 
exceedingly badly informed concerning the Lower Egyptian nomes in pre-Ptolemaic 
times, and new evidence may still be discovered which will upset some of our assump¬ 
tions. Provisionally it must be assumed that the towns just alluded to were originally 
allotted to one or other of the standard seventeen nomes \ some slight confirmation 
is to be found in the list from the Chapel of SesostHs I, where Bast is mentioned 
as a deity of the Heka-<3ndj or Heliopolite nome (here 15th, later Xlllth nome), 
whereas in Graeco-Roman times Bubastis was the capital of the XVII 1th nome. 
Standing forth above these perplexities we now have the well-established facts (i) that 
^ Behdet, not Sambehdet, was the early name of the XVIIth Lower Egyptian 
nome, and (2) that from the Eighteenth Dynasty onward custom regarded the nome 
of Behdet as the last, i.e. presumably the northernmost, nome of Egypt, Just as It 
had previously regarded the of Behdet, after w-hich the nome w'as obviously 
named, as the northernmost town of the entire country. 

We have become acquainted with Low'er Egj'ptlan Behdet as name of a town, as 
name of a nome, and as name of a supplementary district. The explanation of the 
district is conjectural, but the guess already put on record can now be further elabor¬ 
ated. My supposition is that the district of Behdet owed its artihcial existence to a 
feeling on the part of the priests that this northernmost town of their land, the home of 
its great god Horus, ought to find a place in their processions of nomes, and a place as 
far as possible away from the nome containing Elephantine, We now' sec that, by the 
addition of nomes XVIII, XlX, and XX, Behdet had ceased to be the last of the scries. 
From the reign of Ptolemy VII we have a brief enumeration of supplementaty' districts 
following immediately upon the nomes of Lower Egypt,^ each district with separate 
figures representing tts = mr ‘canaP or ‘stretch of river’, its ft- ‘territory’, and its 
^pk ‘hinterland water’. For the XVIIth nome the list gives | ^ Sambehdet,^ and under 
its tif ‘territory’, significantly called nitet mktt ‘the Northern City’, i.e. the 

Northern Thebes, the words ‘Thou art the divine god, who came into being of himself, 
hidden one (imn) whose name is hidden’ make clear allusion to the 
name of that god Amun whom we shall alwrays find associated with Sambehdet.’* 
Notwithstanding the presence of Sambehdet at its proper place in the nome-list, the 

' Th«c three n«rws are atio absent from (i) the list of ilie time of (.[ashepsSwe at D«r cl-Eta^^ri (ed. 
Naville, [v], pi. j aS), and (a) the list of Selhos I at Abydus, Msriette, Ahydta, i. pi. 14.; they were probably 
absent too from (3) the list of Tuthmosif III st Kamak, published in DOmirrheit, [ntchr,, t, pi. 90. 

All these lists have pecutiarides that cannot be discussed here, and (i) and {3) are full of lacunae; in none of 
them is the naine of dtc XVIlth nome given, and in (z) Behdet secfns to be replaced by 'Lower 

Egypt’, Note, however, that a nome or district written is found among other geographical persDnifica- 

dons in the temple of h^urnah {temp, Rameses TI), see Brugseh, Gtogr. Itachr.. i. pi. iz. No. TV. 

* Ch., Ed. IV, at ff. ■* Op. cit., iv, 35, No. LXV, 

* Cf. 'the temple of Amun of the Northern City’* Naville, pi. 46. 



following supplemetitaiy districts end’ with which can be proved to read ItfBhd(t), 

i.e, the Atef-tree of Behdet;^ that the Behdet here rather abnonnally written is none 
other than the Behdet which was the equivalent of Satnbehdet» is shown by the words at 
the end of the legend ‘Thou art Aroun, lord of the marshes 

and papyrus swamps (idh), roaming the backwaters {sfh sSw, see Wb. iii, 420, 15) at 
the river-mouth* \ that at the same time this Behdet was the famous home of Horus 
the Behdetite is suggested by the identifying phrases belonging to the te of that districts 
‘Thou art ^ the Behdetite making provision for the subject-people (rAy^), and every¬ 
one praiseth thee*. The district here mentioned is obviously the same as that written 
^ var. the supplementary series of Ptolemy XI w'hence Sethe deduced 

his Damanhur;^ it is the same not only because the capital is there given as 
Samhehdet, but also because the district immediately preceding in both tases is the 
problematical district w^ritten However, in this later list of supplementary districts 
J// is not the final district; it looks to me, therefore, as though this longer list were the 
result of two successive extensions, the first reaching to 0, which we have seen to 
be virtually equivalent to Behdet, and the second similarly ending with Behdet 
and motivated by the same desire to have Behdet at the end. If this argumentation be 
sound, further support is lent to my hypothesis that Sethe's Dmi-n~Hr ‘Town of 
Homs' was none other than the Behdet identical w'ith or near to Sambehdet. 

That the bohw called Behdet was co-extensive and identical with the nome called 
Sambehdet needs no further demonstration, and the determinative e always accom¬ 
panying the hieroglyphic writing of both place-names 1$ sufficient proof that this 
nome took those alternative names from its capital town. On the other hand, I know 
of no absolute proof that the tmon of Behdet was situated on exactly the same spot as 
the iotett of Sambehdet. That the latter derived its name from the former will become 
the more evident the further we proceed, and this connexion of the names suggests local 
proximity, if not identity. The only indication which appears to argue such complete 
identity is the well-known inscription of Amcnophis IV at Gebel es-Silsilah,+ where 
the king’s first act is stated to have been to command one of his officials to undertake 
all constructional works es 1 ^( 1 ^ ‘from Elephantine to Sambehdet*. 

Scholars agree in equating the second place-name here with and grounds will 

be provided hereafter for accepting that view. There has, however, been some 
difference of opinion concerning the whereabouts of this northern limit. Some have 
supposed it to be a town in Middle Egypt,* but I feel convinced that Sambehdet in 

' Op. ut., iv, 41, No. LXXXIX. 

* S« abovep 37, n. a; the tree of this nsme oemrs also in the writings of ihc XI 11th and XIVth rtpmea 

of Upper Egypt, see Srthc, Urg^chichtt, § 57, * See abov*e, p, 37. 

^ Leps.^ Detfkm. ui, no, i = Am. iii, ^ Bo first Brugsd), Diet, giogr. 705. 

* Newbeny in Proe. SM.A. kjchv, 122, n. 21, end, quotes this passage in cormeiuon with Xlch Dyn, inscnp- 

tions giving Elephantine and 'IS as the boundaries of the Idngdom of that rime i the latter place, however^ 
ti the Serpent nome (Xth of U.E.). Bnigsoh, who read the name Sam-hud-ri (op. dt,, 70S) cormecied it with 
Arabic Coptic and found the Egyprian original of this in the list of deities of towna now best 

edited in CtLp Ed., VI, 234. Gatithier, Diet, g/ogr., v, 33, adheres to this but there is no serious evidence 
of an Upper Egyptian Sambehdet. The presence of Horus the Bchde^ttte in the Edfii list just mentioned pointa> 
as we see below, p, 4+, to the originai Behdet in Lower Eg^pt 



the far North b meant and that the phrase, as Breasted happily obsen,'ed,i is an 
analogy to the Bihltcal ‘from Dan to Beersheba'. But if so, then Sambehdet here must 
be a later substitute for the Behdet of the cubits and of the monument of Scsostris I. 

III. The localization, name, and cults of Sambehdet 

Our search for the original Behdet thus resolves itself into the problem of the 
topographical position of Sambehdet, and in this matter there is no longer room for 
doubt. References to the town are numerous, and Gauthier, Dkt.giogr, v, 33, enumer¬ 
ates most of the early ones. Here only a selection is necessary, given in chronological 
order and provided with letters to facilitate later quotation, (g) The earliest mention 
may well be a j/iiratwA/i-figure in a private collection at Birkenhead, attributed to 
middle XVIII; this names (read 'the 

first prophet of Amun in Sambehdet, the chief of sculptors, Ya’,^ {&) The inscrip¬ 
tion of Amenophis IV at Gebel es-Silsilah, above, p. 40. (r) Various objects belonging 
to Nebwaf, tetnp, Haremhab his titles are given in various forms, but com¬ 
prise ‘first prophet of Amun in the Island'; 

‘first prophet of Amen-Rcf, king of the gods, in Sam-n-Behdet'; among the deities 

‘[Mut], lady of heaven, sojourning in Sam-n-Behdet’, (2) 
Ttah-Seker-Osiri sojourning in Sam-n-Behdet’. (/f) Quite recently 
Naguib Farag published^ a stela of Ramesses II recording his dedication of a temple to 
‘his father Amen-Re^, lord of Sam-n-Behdet’; above the text Ramesses 11 

Is shown, censer in hand, before a seated Amun and a standing Mut and Khons; 
above this scene there was probably a solar disk flanked by two uraei; the editor 
states: Au^dessous de ce groups on distingue assez difficilenient un dieu Amon assis sur 
te signs Au-dessous on voit encore les signes 'f] qui devaient probablemeni ilre sums 
de t-ills de laquelle le dieu Anton dtait te seigneur. The photograph is rather 

indistinct in this central upper portion, but confirms the first part of this statement; 
at the end I believe there is and nothing more. 

The monuments above mentioned will suffice for a start. Of great importance is 
the provenance of (rf); Naguib Farag writes concerning It, . . .jeois ceite stele pris du 
Rest-House du donuiine d^El-Atrache. EUe provenait de Tell el-Hagar qui se trouve 
d 3 kilometres de Tell el-Bahmoun {Moudirielt Gharbteh, Markaz CherUne). Ce tell 
est d environ Jj kUometres* au nord de Cherhine. Measured on the i: 50,000 Survey 
Dq>t. map the insignificant mound called K6m el-Ijlagar is 7 km. to the north-west 
of Tell el-Balamun, and Kafr el-Atrash is quite close to the former. Concerning Tell 
el-Balamun (so most authorities, but the Surv'cy map prints Tell el Balamana) 
Hogarth, who first proposed the identification with Diospolis Inferior, says that the 

■ Rtcords, it^ p. 384, R. A. * PrtK. SfK. Bibl. Anh. 

^ Sm\ vtlj; 269 fT. Lcgniti's copies do not insptFc confidcnccT. nor yet docs Borchkardt’« copy of the 
statue Cairo in Status und Siatuetf^n {CCG}^ ill, p. 135 ^ but poshly the origmah are dcfecti^-c. For the 
word here rendered ' l$knd^—undoubtedly the correct tendering, see below, — i* printed only once, other 
fKxurrence^ being gi\'en ba ^ or On this Nebwa^ $cc further Lcfebvre,. dhi pr/lreg, 243 fF. 

* Ami. Sm/. looax, 117 ff. 

^ Thi$ 14 accurate only if the distance li measured along the Damjcm biweb to a point eaat of the TeJl. 
On a bee-line the distance- is about 10 




circumference must be nearly 2 miles, and the sumniit 50 feet above the plain;' 
Edgar, who as Inspector-General for the Delta not improbably visited the site, ac¬ 
cepted this identification and stated that there are remains of a great Ramesside 
temple of lim^tone, granite, and basalt.^ The distance to the coast-line is almost 
exactly 20 km,, most of the mter%'ening part being marked as under water. The dis¬ 
tance from the Damietta branch east of the Tell is less than 5 km. 

\Vhether Naguib Farag’s stela had previously lain at Kom el-Hagar or not, its 
original home was probably the not far distant Tell el-Balamun, which we must view, 
on the strength of Edgar’s statements, as the capital of the nome in Ramesside times. 
The great Edfii nome-Iist (above, p. 38) names ^“( 1 ™© Ff-iw-n-lwm ‘The Island 
of Amun' as capital of the XVI 1 th nome, and it is hardly possible to resist Spiegelberg’s 
conclusion that this is the etv'mology of Balamun, the / representing the genitival 
of the hieroglyphic spelling,^ Confirmation is afforded by the Rylands list of bishoprics,* 
which under -xiocnoAic i.e. Diospolis Inferior, gives the equivalence 

noyittAioy town Pounemou'n) = El-Kalmiin’, where J is clearly a 

miswriting of EI-Falmun being either an error for, or local pronunciation of, 

El-Balamun. This Diospolis is named by Strabo (xvn, r, 19) and others, and 
JiotrnroAvnjf Kortu occuis as one of several Delta names on a Theban 
ostracon of the third centuiy,* and is known also from bronze 
coins of Hadrian (fig. 2),^ of which the reverse shows the ram of 
Amun. Despite the doubts of Gauthier,the combined evi¬ 
dence of Naguib Farag’s stela and of the name Tell el-Balamun 
finally demonstrates the whereabouts of the XVIIth nome of 
the hieroglj'phic lists. It is less certain whether the name ‘The Island of Amun’ is 
another name of the iomt of Sambehdet; in the course of centuries the capital may 
have shifted from one site to another, but the general position is now^ sufficiently 
determined. A few more notes on P/-itv~n- 7 mn seem desirable. The oldest occurrence 
is on the statue of the master-builder MinmosS under Tuthmosis HI; among the many 
temples where he made constructions or repairs is that of 

‘[Amen-Re^, lord of throjnes of the Two Lands, in Island of Amun’.® The next 
earliest mention of the complete name, duly recognized by Gauthier, Di^t.geogr., i, 44, 
is P. Cairo 32J4^,^ probably of the end of the Eighteenth Dynasty, where a woman 
native of the place is mentioned; here is clearly written. In Ramesside 

hieratic “ and are made exactly alike, and it is a mere matter of convention 
which transcription one chooses; in the BHndiog of Truth (P. Chester Beatty 11 }^ 
9, 2 I have transeribed hut in the Goldnischeff Onomasticon^ 51 ii 

^ Jotirn. HtIL Studies, XXIv li. * Ann. Smr. Viii, 177. 

^ Spiegdberg, Agypt^ogudu Randglats^n Ali^ Tatan^ntf 35, with n. 3, 

* Mam^tp dfs ds r£^Iae p. 48, 38^. Spi^i^lbcr^ f^lt a dilBcuItT^ about 

noY- for but in so corrup t a MS. orie must not Jocik too clo&ely at minor detaik of spelling. Thk pIflCB 

must not be cmifused with EKBaramiiTTL of the Id. in Bull. Soe. d"Arch. Coptt^ V* 235^ 

nor yet with m villige EhBsdamiinH 7 km. south of Es-SimbelMw^n* * MiJcie^ Theban Onraea^ No- 131- 

* Reproduced from Feuardent, di Demelrio, p. 323; I owe the reference to Dr., Milne, 

^ Les JVoms d'£gypte, iby IT. ■ Driotonp Foiddes de M^damoud £*e$ insctipliitmy p. 34, 1 . zz* 

* The number k tsken from the back of a photograph in my po&&mion. 

FfC- z. 



an incomktency which will, 1 trust, be regarded as venial. Apart 
from an uncertain demotic example and a strange and doubtful quoted by 

Brugsch, Diet, geogr. 395, the only other occurrence that has been noted is the 
abbreviation 'The Island' in (c) above; if, as seems probable, the two titles in 

that collection of inscriptions refer to the same priestly function, then we must accept 
the complete identity of Sambehdet and ‘The Island of Amun', In conclusion, it 
must be observed that Brugseh’s comparison' of the latter name with the rtoxv^pLowit 
which Ptolemy gives as the capital of Karm TiSmut-, the nomc Sebennnes 

Inferior, is entirely out of the question; apart from the inacceptable reading of = as 
b»n, Hogarth^ has shown from an inscription found at Kom el-KhanzIrl and from 
other conclusive considerations that /la^ra^oiivir lay there or thereabouts, well over 
65 km. to the north-west of Tell el-Balamun, and Ptolemy confirms this position; see 
the sketch-map, PI. v, 2, 

To hark back to the inscriptions cited above on p. 41, the unexplained symbol "fi 
lends probability to the identification in (6) of w*ith Sambehdet, see p. 40. 

Otherwise, the information thence to be gleaned concerns only the name and the cults 
of the latter town. Both (c) and (</) yield Smf-n-Bhiit 'Sam-n-Behdet' as the full 
New Kingdom form of the name. This form I have found again only on a curious 
two-faced stela of Ptolemaic or Roman date now' in Athens here the king (the car¬ 
touche is unfilled) is seen worshipping Amcn-R&s Mut, and Khons, each of them 
described as ^=7 ‘lord' {or 'lady’) of on the very roughly cut verso there is a 

writing that on the photograph looks like The insertion of the n only rein¬ 

forces the impression that the name is compounded of the two elements smt ‘unite’, 
‘union’ and Bkdt, and Kces (n, 71) has convincingly showm that the latter place-name 
is connected with the word bhdn' ‘throne’ and so means something like ‘Place 

of the Throne’. Thus the entire compound might signify ‘Union of the place of the 
throne’ or something of the kind. 

.43 regards the cults of Sambehdet, that of the entire Theban triad is proved by 
stela {(^) and by that in Athens. Amen-Re< is often named, for Graeco-Roman examples 
see p. 37. Mut occurs occasionally, e,g. Ch., Ed. ii, 57; Leps., Dettkm.f Text, it, 191, 
both times in company with Amen-Rc<; a nome-list at Denderah identifies its goddess 
Hathor with Mut of Sambehdet, Ch., Dend, i, 127; an Edfu nome-list already used 
mentions as being in the XVIIth nome.'* References to Khons are 

rarer, but see on a eippiis of Horus, Wilkinson, Manners and Customs, ed. Birch, 
HI, pi, 33 opposite p. 152. On (c), where the name of Mut is probably lost in a lacuna, 
there is found an isolated reference to Ptah-Seker-Osiri. The presence of Onuris-Shu 
is attested by Brugsch, Diet. gAfgr. 30 on a sculptured block from Mit Rahtnah (New 
Kingdom?); it occurs in the title ‘first prophet of Amen- 

Re<, lordi of Sambehdet and of Onuris-Shu, son of Re<’; Brugsch renders Onuris as 
though in apposition, but the Athens stela has ‘Khons, lord of 

* DkL gfQgr. 30. * JHS J 31 V (1904)1 S 

3 Pkiblishcd by MflOtt, Rec. Tr 4 iv. 3 m il, ^ f,p and in phonograph by P^rtntr^ Ag. GrabsfitTi^ unii D^nJattiw 
aui Alh^ itftif KaFUMniinopfi^ pi. 13, 3$^+ Malkt hu ontc or twice excusably mislead | L 

^ Ch,, Ed. VI, 41, No. LXVIIL 



Sam-n-Behdet, Shu,' soq of Re^’ showing that Onuris was equated with the third 
member of the triad, not w'ith the first.^ Corresponding to Onuris'Shu we shall later 
find his consort Tphenis in this same locality (p. 53, n. 3), 

In the temple of Sahure^ and on the Lisht statues the god of Lower Egyptian 
Behdet is Homs, and the later complete predominance of Amen-Re* at Samfe^det 
might appear to some a fatal obstacle to the identification of the two places. But, in 
the first place, Horus the Behdetite is not absolutely alien to the cults of Sambehd^t. 
The only occasion on which he actually replaces Amen-Re' is in a list of local deities 
at Edfu'Horus the Behdetite, lord of Sambehdet’ is the penultimate 
entry of a aeries ranged consecutively from south to north; as noted already (p. 40, 
n. 6) Bmgsch and others have claimed this Sambehdet as a town in Upper Eg)T>t, 
but the other evidence for such a tow'n is of the poorest quality. It is true that in the 
list here quoted the preceding towns, so far as they are certainly identifiable,* belong 
to Upper Egypt, but there is no cogent reason w'hy the designer of the series of divine 
figures should not have made a large jump at this point, especially if he w'as short of 
space. There is better authority, however, for the assimilation of the tw'o gods. A 
Denderah scene already cited* furnishes Amen-Re', lord of Sambehdet, with the 
epithets 'the divine god who came into being of himself,* Harakhti as a goodly youth, 
hidden one whose name is hidden,* of the variegated 

plumage, Horus who came forth from the horizon^—he is the Behdetite, the lord of 
the two heavens’. So, too, in an Edfu text, likevrise already utilized,’ where the legend 
attached to the figure of Sambehdet closes with the words, ‘Thou 

art he of the variegated plumage, w'ho came forth from the horizon, the Behdetite, 
the lord of the two heavens'. Doubtless a further search would bring to light more 
evidence of the kind. 

Even better calculated to dissipate the objection here under discussion are certain 
general considerations now to be advanced. It must be realized that where^'er Amen- 
He' appears as the god of a provincial locality, he can of necessity be no older than the 
Twelfth Dynasty—the period when the insignificant demigod Amun became fused 
with the sun-god and rose to power in Kamak as ‘lord of the Thrones of the Two 
Lands’, as ‘kingof the gods', in fine as the new national god, the patron of the monarchy.® 
If the locality was an old one, not a new colony like Napata, Amen-Re' cannot but 
have replaced some earlier god, and this will have been true in the IVth and Vlth 
Lower Egyptian nomes no Jess than in the XVIIth. But in the XVIIth nome Amen- 
Re' would be superlatively suited to supersede, or to absorb into himself, the more 

' Mallei printed ^ for p, but wrongly, since in the ccutiesp«nding keend on the t cHO he himself has [1. 

* JunJter, Otturislttgemie, lo6 f,. also 3U|rgests a connexion of OnQris with the nome of DiospoUs Inferior 

(he UTOte Parva by mistake), hut on diflbi:ent grounds. t Ch., Eti. v(. 134, 

* The conclusion here advocated w'ould become cettain if the place-jimne (i.e. Jdb) in the pre¬ 

ceding entry proved, contrary' to the view expressed by Gauthier, Diet. gAigr. i, Ji6, to be identiiubic with 
the **> cf- 'he psLiallel text Mariette, Dettd, (v, 75,17) given u CEpital of the Xllth 

Lower Egyptian iwnw of Sebennytua. * Leps., Brnkm,, Text, ll, igi. 

* These same epithets in reference to the god of Sambehdet, See above, p. jg, with footnote 3. 

^ Chassinat, Matmmti. 67, see abot^, p, 38, w ith footnote i. Identically also, Ch., Ed. rv. No. LXVl. 

* Setbe, und die Achl Ur^Utr von Hrrmopolii (in .-JAh. Berlin, 193$), 55 9 ff, 


ancient local deity, Horus the Behdetite, through whatever historical events or theolo¬ 
gical speculations, had veiy" early become, first the representative god of Lower Egypt, 
and then the guardian of the united kingdoms. At the beginning of the Old Kingdom 
his cult had been transplanted to Edfu, and Edfu had grown into such importance that 
the name of Horus the Behdetite no longer suggested the Delta, but rather the Upper 
Egj'ptian town. The priesthood of Sambehdet would now not unnaturally prefer to 
claim Amen-Re' as their own. They will have flattered themselves with the boast 
that it was in their town, or using their town as a base, that Amcn-Re< had consum¬ 
mated the union of the Two Lands. It seems not unlikely that the significant alteration 
of the name Behdet into Sambehdet or Sam-n-Behdet (sec above, p. 43) took place 
simultaneously with the change over of the cult from Horus to Amen-Re', Our 
material dealing with the point goes back no farther than the Eighteenth Dynasw, 
but there is no imperative reason why the two related modifications should not have 
been effected in the Twelfth, For the reason already stated, any earlier date is im¬ 

In Graeco-Roman times the Insistence on the part played by Sambehdet in the 
unification (wn/) of Upper and Lower Egypt is very marked. A Dendcrah text which 
exists in two somewhat varying forms describes Sambehdet as *the place of 

uniting the Two Lands’.' .A.t Edfu the legend accompanying the figure of the XVIIth 
nome runs thus:^ *Hc brings thee Sambehdet with its abundance, the offering of the 
marshland thou art the Sole Lord uniting the Two 

I.ands beneath his throne {bkdt-f), and there is no king reft of his seat’ ; the last words 
are found again at Medamud.^ In more than one place in the temple of Edfu the king 
is shown presenting *papyrus reeds and rushes' to Amun ‘the lord of 

Sambehdet’, together with his consort Mut; the accompanying legends are of great 
interest, but for the moment I merely note that .^mun in his reply says in one instance 
‘I unite for thee the Two Lands’* and in another ‘I cause thee to unite the Two Lands 
beneath thy throne on the seat of Re^ in SambehdetI will conclude with the most 
ancient reference to this act of union which has thus far been founds it occurs in the 
great inscription of the temple of Hibis and is no older than the reign of Darius I.** 
A long panegyric is addressed to Amen-Re' by the eight primeval beings of Hermopolb. 
Soon after an allusion to the settling in Chemmis — a sure sign that the author 

had Horus in mind—the text continues^“^ 

'Thou hast united the Two Lands beneath thy throne of union{?) on thy seat of 
Sambehdet, thy pure place within The passage is the more interesting 

because, although the whole is a eulogy of Amcn-Re<, the writer does not forget that 
the great Theban god is here only continuing the work of Horus under a new guise. 

* Ch.p Dend. ii» Marietta, D^nddruhy iv, 75, ii, 

* Ch,, Ed. rVp 3.5, t 4 S‘ s^nicncc with the word cf. Id.p D^d. 1, 1^7+ batter 

* Driqton, dc Mifdiim(fud loj. * Ch,, Ed. lllp 237, » Op. dt., it, 57, 

* Bmttisch, Thes. 634P 29 f; sw also the transliilrlDnp ibid. 675, 

^ For ^l/, see above, p. 37, n, 3+ However^ the reading is a mttc guw on my part. Bmg^h, 

folIou''ed by Gauthier, Drct.gdagr^ iv, S4 to be the fJvit-Nhl in the Vllth nome of Lower Ejyptp 

see paftfcuUrly Marie ttr, Dtnddrafi^ 1V+ 75^ 11; in that case it would be necessary to render "^and thy pure 
place ii within He-nilhe^F 


The motive for this transformation seem hinted m a text from which I quoted only 
a few lines hack, and where Amun of Sambehdet is described as 'the great god pre¬ 
eminent in Southern Behdet (t.c. Edfu) who hid 

(imtt) his body in the divine disk in order to hide {itrtn) his divine person in the 
marshes\‘ Once again we detect without difficulty a reference to the youthful Horus, 
who here is seeking to conceal himself from his enemy Seth. 

IV, Homs the Be^detlte as the winged disk and as emblem of the united 

Egyptian Kingdom 

The mention of the "divine disk^ i^py) example brings into connexion 

with Amun of Sambehdet that symbol of the Great Winged Disk ‘'py 

literally ‘the Great Flier’, see Wb. i, 179, 32; 180, 5) which is so much more closely 
associate with the Southern Behdet (Edfu). There, on the walls of the famous 
Ptolemaic temple, the story' of this aspect of Horus the Behdetite is recounted at 
length, clearly from the standpoint of a priesthood jealously claiming him as its own. 
The narrative tells how after the sun-god Re<-Harakhti had landed in the nome of 
which Edfu was the capital, Horus the Behdetite was accompanying him in his barque 
when he espied certain enemies plotting against the supreme deity. Thereupon the 
Behdetite flew to heaven as the Great Winged Disk, and set about conquering the foe. 
Many were the defeats inflicted upon them both in Egypt and in Nubia. The conflict 
at an end, Re^-Harakhti commanded Thoth, ‘Thou shalt make this winged disk in every 
place in which I have rested, in the places of the gods in Upper Egypt and in the places 
of the gods in Lower Egypt’. Thus originated the emblem to be seen over every temple 
doorway throughout the entire length of the land. 

An excellent version of the complete text is now available in an article by Fairman.- 
It has been much disputed whether the victories here recorded reflect historical events 
or not. Newberry* saw in them an echo of the Seth rebellion and the reconquest of 
Egypt by Peribsen, the most concrete of the many suggestions that have been made; 
Fairman^ thinks this theory attractive, but is unwilling to commit himself to any 
definite opinion. In the debate earned on by Kecs and Sethe New^berry's theory 
appears to have been ignored; Sethe* hesitatingly advanced the hypothesis that the 
last bbw in the struggle between the followers of Horus the Behdetite and those of 
Seth of Ombos may have been struck in Edfu; Kees,® in a thoughtful article marred 
by that obscurity of style which so often hinders full appreciation of his learning and 
real, if somewhat perverse, originality, quotes with approval Maspero’s comment that 
les chocs d*urm^es ont lieu parlout oit te dieu Sli pessede des partisans et an sanctuairey 
and consequently denies any early historical basis to the Edfu legend; on the other 
hand, he discovers in it certain traits attributable to Ramesside conditions and to 
the later antagonism between Egy^ptians and Persians. To myself this verdict seems 
very' probable. 

‘ ^ ■♦ 5 ' ‘ dneimt Egypt, vjt (192*), 4* ff. 

* yBA, xxiyaSi n, s, i Sethe, VrsfsMchu, 5 

♦ Kulllrgt 7 «it uHd Urgttchichte, in Nae/tr. 1930, 345 ff- Pp- J+S (T, conl*in « vsliuble «view 

of the differeiii opinion*. ^ Maapero, dt h. jaj. 



At all events the legend of the Winged Disk as recounted by the priests of Edfu was 
merely local and provincial. The real meaning of that commonly used adornment of 
Egyptian architecture escaped notice until the first step towards its discovery' was 
taken by Schafer in rgaSd In his book on the cosmological conceptions of the Egyp¬ 
tians Schafer drew attention to the ivory comb of the reign of King Djet (Dyn, I) 
shortly before discovered by Petrie' (see here pi. vi, fig, 4) and compared it with certain 
Old Kingdom modes of exhibiting the king’s name, e.g. that here reproduced from 
the temple of Sahur^ (ph vi, fig. 5).^ In the latter the sign for heaven is seen at the 
top, while the base shows an image of the t\vo-headed earth-god ikr ‘Aker’;* 

at the sides the sign \ for ttvi ‘prosperity’ completes the framing of the name. Schafer 
sums up the meaning of the entire picture in the words, ‘the great conception of the 
king’s nature, imbued with divine life, filling the whole of space to the limits of heaven 
and earth and being protectively surrounded by these’.^ In place of the sign here 
the ivory comb has an unmistakable pair of wings, and that they, as Schafer points 
out, themselves represent the heavens, is shown by the fact that the divine bark sails 
upon them just as often it sails upon the back of the goddess Nut. A couple of pages 
further on Sch^er brings this representation into connexion with the Winged Disk, 
of which he offers a tentative explanation. The god of the Lower Egyptian town 
Behdet, he tells us (accepting Sethe’s view of the location of Behdet), w^as a sky-god, 
conceived of as a falcon ^ here on the comb the artist contented himself in archaic 
fashion with showing only a pair of wings directly joined to one another. When in 
the Pyramid Age the solar conceptions came into greater prominence, it was only 
natural that the sun’s disk should ^ inserted between the wings, which thus obtained 
a body, much to the relief of a more developed artistic sense. Consequently the 
Winged Disk could, on occasion, be depicted on stelae below, and separately from, the 
sign for heaven, though the conception of the wings as an image of the sky was never 
completely forgotten. 

Thus far Schafer. The subject was discussed afresh by Sethe in his Urgeschuhte 
(§§ 155(1.), and there assumes a somewhat different aspect. Sethe stresses the fact 
that the wings are regularly displayed as parts or members (Korperteile) of the sun, 
and in his view the symbol possesses more conspicuously the character of a sun-god 
than that of a god of the sky. He considers it impossible for the conception of the 
Winged Disk to have originated in the provincial town of Edfu, and insists that it was 
a product of that prehistoric united kingdom, with its capital in Heliopolis, which 
according to him developed out of the conquest of Upper by Lower Egypt. In a 

■ SchSfer, Weligtfiaudt dtr idun Agypttr, 113 f. 

“ Ptftrie^ Tbrnfiij of the pL iip S- Schifer saw clearly that no iim could have atood betweeu the 

wings, though a break concods the place w here jomed on to one another. Von Blssing disputed this 

point (Z.'JS LXiv, Hi), fain hk view refuted fay Engelbach in conjunction with others, see ZAS Lxv, 
115 L, w'facte there k a splendid photo^ph of the originaJ comb. 

J Sdnilcr’s schematic reprodiic&on of the fmmtngp deriv'ed from Borch., ph 1 1 nnd p. 64, rather 

Unfortunately omits the sun with the tw’o Ursci above the Horus falcon ; the original^ Schafer infonm m, is 
incomplete. A more complete example k to be found op. dc., p. 34, fig. 28, * 12^ 6. 

* \ . die Vorstellungp wie daa mit gmtlichem Leben beschcnkic Wesen dcs K>6fiigs den Raum bia 

%u den Greii2en de4 HimmeLa und der Erde erfuLk tind von diesen schQtzend umfasst wild.* 


striking passage Sethe sets forth his theory that the symbol was created as a sort of 
coat of arms (ejjie A.rt for the newly united Egypt, the two wrings having 

deliberate reference to the two halves of the country, just as in the Double Eagle 
of the German Emperors the two heads have reference to the eastern and western 
halves of the Roman Empire. 

The evidence adduced to vindicate' this concept of a ‘Janus-Hke double being’ 
{jattmartiges Doppeltaeien) is both plentiful and convincing, Sethe notes that one of 
the oldest representations dating from the reign of Neuserre* (Dyn. V) accompanies the 
Winged Disk with the words ‘the good god, lord of the Two Lands’,* and that 
here, as in most other examples both early and late, the solar disk has two uraei iCb, 
whereas the sun-god usually has but one to protect him against his enemies. Each 
of these two uraei looks in the direction of one of the wings, and they are ultimately 
often depicted wearing the crowns of Upper and Lower Egypt respectively (pi. vi, 
3 )*^ Inscriptions of Ptolemaic date speak of the Winged Disk as ^protecting the 
Two L^ds with his wings’ or use equivalent phrases. Again, it is common to hnd 
immediately beyond the tips of the two wings the word ^ B^iy 'the Behdetite’; in 
this case the signs on the right point in that direction, while those on the left point 
towards the left, e.g. pi, iv; had this word applied to the symbol as a whole, one 
might have expected to find it once only, either above or below, and its presence on 
both sides shows that each wing refers to a separate half of the country. Lastly , in 
support of the contention of the symbol’s Heliopolitan origin, Sethe points to the 
position of Heliopolis midway between the two lands. In the same connexion be makes 
somcfwhat sophistic use of the epithet ^coming forth from the horizon’ 

found as e^Iy as the Fifth Dj-nasty,-* and he notes that Ret-Harakhti ‘Ret-Horus- 
of-the-Horizon’ was specifically the name of the deity of Heliopolis, a fusion of falcon 
and sun. 

These two interesting views have been summarized almost without comment 
because many of my readers are doubtless unfamiliar with them. To turn now to 
criticisms of my own, 1 miss in both hypotheses any consideration of the related and 
actually earlier representations of the Behdetite as a falcon-god hovering over the head 
of ^e king representations very frequent in scenes alike of ritual and of warlike 
achievement,* Also I consider it open to q uestion whether the connexion of the Winged 
Disk with Bebdet was as ancient as both Schafer and Sethe supposed; the earliest 
• Gardiner & Feet, Irucriptiom o/ Sinai, pi. 6, No, lo. 

^ H, Prinz, Aha^taluefu SynOolik, p. 45, n. 4, quotea NaviHc, Dtir rf fioAon (n), pi. 43, hero reproduced, 
iwth aoDie rMtoratiHi, pi. VI, fig. 3; Petrie, Six Tfmpla. pi. 10(Amonophis III); Mariette, AfomrwenuZlTcm, 
pi. 43 - Urk. II. aS (Ptolemy II), In the last example, aa also Lep«., Denkm, iv, 11, b. the umei are explicitly 
named Ndthbet and EdjO {vulgo Bute) respectively. 

^ Mentioned in the text of Borchardi, Crabdfttkntal der KSnigi Ne^titer-Ref, p, $3, but not depicted 
^ M six stelae in the ptecincts of the Step Pj raimd (above, p, 3a} show the falcon hovering abiive the 
king, but so far as can be seen the epitbcl Bfidti acoompanics It only once. The same emblem above the titulary 
of Snofru on the canopy of Queen Hetepljras (Bull. AfFA. Boston, xxv. SuppJ., cover) tihearise jacks the 
epithet, u does alw a relief of Cheops. Gardiner it Feet. ItutripnoHt of Sinai, pi. i. No. 7 on the other 
hand, it is present in the graffito of Cheops at Atithes. FefriqrrAn/lea, p], IV, No i Obviously the 

OTgmnmtum ox fiitniio must not be used, and aU that can be said » that the connexion with Behdei aoes bick 
as far aa the Third Dyiuisty. 


example of the t^vofoJd epithet dates only from the Sixth Dynast)-,' and in the oldest 
occurrence of the Winged Disk that has been quoted—that above the elaborately 
decorated sail of King Sahurp’s ship of state (pi. vi, %. i)^—not only is it accompanied 
by the hovering falcon, this therefore presumably regarded as a distinct entity or, 
if the same, as engaged in a different activity, but also perhaps it is the falcon alone 
which is described as Bkdti^ while the Disk, here for once without the uraci, receives 
merely the epithet ‘the great god, with variegated plumage'.^ Early evidence is 
scanty, but it seems not unlikely that the attribute ‘the Behdetite’ was at first confined 
to the hovering falcon, and only secondarily borrowed thence to be applied to the 
Winged Disk. Sethe’s view that the wings symboliite Upper and Lower Eg)'pt 
respectively must be accepted without hesitation, but I add the conjecture that the 
twofold writing of the epithet BhdU was suggested by the knowledge that this falcon - 
god had a cult-centre called Behdet both in the extreme north and in what in early 
dynastic times may w’cll have been the extreme south 

I will now put forward a theory of my own, and one which seeks to conciliate those 
of Schafer and Sethe, w-hilst adding something to them. When Sch^er speaks of 
the two wings on the comb as a symbol of the sky, but at the same time mentions Horus 
the Behdetite, he implicitly acknowledges them to have been conceived of as the 
wings of a falcon, but he strangely omits to mention that immediately below, as well 
as in the celestial boat above, a falcon is actually depicted, and both must surely be 
the falcon to which the wings belong. The falcon in the boat must be the sun-god 
himself visualized under that image, while the falcon above the frA-banner is known to 
represent the god incarnate in King Djet whose name follows. Thus in this forerunner 
of the Winged Disk symbol we discern the fusion of the sun-god Ret, of the falcon 
Horus, and last but not least, of the reigning king whose name fills the universe, and 
whose protection extends over both North and South; just as the sun, in the guise of 
a flying falcon, spreads light and colour like wings over the entire land—hence the 
e[dtbeton constans ’j'jJ. Surely this complex significance, if I have rightly diagnosed 
it, is enough to start with and does not need the further complication of a reference to 
the tow-n of Behdet. W'e cannot in truth decide at what moment such a reference 
associated itself with this particular symbol. As 1 have already hinted, there are some 
slight indications that the association was due to subsequent theological speculations, 
as is at all events certain of the epithet nb Min 'lord of Mesen’* sometimes later 

But I have still to substantiate my theory that from the very beginning the Winged 
Disk represented the king’s actual person, though only as immanent in the visible sun, 
this again being imaged as equipped with wings proclaiming its identit)- with the falcon 

* Gardintf & P«T. op. cit., pi. 8, No. tS. » Borvh.. Soft, ii, pi. g. 

^ S*th* (loc- dt„ Trtl. p. 84) takes both epithets as rererrinK to the Winged Disk, but the direction in ti hich 
both the falcon and the epithet face pouitt tn the view suggested by me. 

* Sethe. t/rsewAjcAfe, 5 152, argues fncim the fact that the subsequent tit U.E, ncrnic bore the name 
‘Nubian Land' that this must originally have belonged to Nubia- That would bring Edfu close to the wuthem 

* AJfcady in Dyn. XI. see F. B. B(i9wn de la Boqueh Tdtf (r^j^ A rgjfly p, 7^, fig. jj. !?„ examples with 
the hovedf^g falcon, Prifw:. op- df,. p, 4Jp ard for thu loivn of Meacn* abov'e, p. it, n, i, 




Horus. The early epithet 'good god, lord of the Two Lands’ lends immediate plausi¬ 
bility to this interpretation. More ambiguous is the epithet 'great god’ applied to the 
Winged Disk at all periods, but it is noteworthy that these words are employed of the 
living king from the Fourth Dynasty onwards."^ Very striking is the dose connexion 
between Winged Disk and royal name, a connexion so intimate that sometimes the 
name finds its way into the symboh while at other times the solar disk forms an integral 
part of the titulary. In fig. 3 is shown the device upon a broken architrave from the 

temple of Sahuret^ where the titles of tl^t monarch, beginning with the falcon ^ in 
each case, stand to right and left of, and facing, the centrally placed sun with the two 
uraei. If anyone should doubt that the sun here, despite the absence of the wings, is 
equivalent to the Winged Disk, he may be confronted with a pyramidion of Hashep- 
sow’et in the Cairo Museum,^ w here is similarly without wings, but has to right 
and left the epithet ^ pointing outwards as when accompanying the wings. Sethe 
himself quoted the Ptolemaic use of Cb as substitute for ^ ni-iai-bti 'King of Upper 
and Lower Egypt’, but failed to draw the necessary conclusion; it is not enough to say 
that the symbol of the Winged Disk was invented as a kmd of coat of arms for the 
united Egyptian kingdom, for it was undoubtedly a depiction, admittedly highly 
figurative and syncretistic, of the king himself. The Berlin Dictionary (ii, 331, 13-15) 
takes back this use of to the Nineteenth Dynasty, and mentions also, though without 
giving chapter and verse, Graeco-Roman instances where the Winged Disk is employed 
as a hieroglyph with the same graphic function; 1 have found what I believe to be tw'o 
examples of this dating from the reign of Ramesses 11 / In his book on Oriental 
symbolism Prinz^ has assembled a large collection of Winged Disks, but none among 
them is more interesting than a subsequently published example (pi. vi, hg. of the 
reign of Ammenemes III, where the prenomen of the king has crept up between the 
uraei (here curiously both with the crown of Lower Egypt) right into the symbol 
itself; the year-date above, and the w^ords ‘good god, lord of the Two Lands’ so close 
to the symbol, are striking confirmation of my view. A further development is seen 
when the wings are absent and replaced by the sky, while the sun, from whose uraeus 
the sign of life is suspended, occupies a place behind the falcon of Horus surmounting 
the /r^-banner {pi. VI, fig. 6).^ Here it is difficult to say where picture ends and 

' Vrk. I, 8, I; 3!, 17; 54. r- 4- * Borch,. Safy, 1, p. 35, fig. i<j. ^ Kuentz, (CGG), pla. 7-9. 

* Am, Setv, KXX, p. 6't. fig. 15, N«4. 5, 6. ’ PHius, op. oit., pp. ti f., 43 IF. 

• Gardifior & Peet. Inscripti^iii of Sinai, pi. 31, No. 100; from later dates, op, eit-. pi- 65, No. 199; pi. 33, 
No, 371; Navtlle, Deir d Bafsari (JV), pi. 106. 

r Kuentz, op. dt., pi. le. On the aoutfi dde of the Lateran obelisk (Marvcchi, Gti Obelifc/ii di Roma, pi. i, 
left), where there is ■ similar irtacripiJon, a small depletion accompanied by a legend of its otvn i« placed 
immediately in fnwit of iHe Horus-sign, and showa the god Amcn-Ret offering 'life’ (’^)to the falcon’s 


titulary begins; we may be sure that an EgjTJtian spectator reading such a column of 
hieroglyphs would not have translated the sky-sign into words, but the evidence of 
many royal titularies, starting with ‘Life (to) the Horus, the victorious bull, &c.’ 

proves that the sign for ‘life*, present already on Djct's ivory comb, would not have 
been forgotten. Egyptologists are accustomed, in such cases, to regard the word as 
a verb Tiives . . .*,1 but possibly an Egyptian reader w'ouid have preferred to under¬ 
stand ^Onekk m H6 t ‘Life (given) to the Horus , .or similarly, Sethe, in rendering 
into German an inscription where the sun stands behind the falcon, gives as equivalent 
the single wwd ‘Horus*,* but it is at least conceivable that a subject of the Tuthmosids 
would have remembered the presence of Ref, if indeed he did not actually translate 
the whole as ‘Ref-Harakhti*, The evidence thus all goes to show that Winged Disk 
and name of king are so inextricably interconnected and blended that we cannot but 
regard the symbol as an image of the king himself, though simultaneously also of Re' 
and of Homs, all three united into a trinity of solar and kingly dominion. For a final 
proof I hark back to the Medamud doorw'ay figured in pi. iv; here all the deities 
on the doorposts present life and prosperity to the king, who on each separate occasion 
is indicated by the hieroglyphic \vords 'to Sesostris’ or ‘to Khafkauref’; on the lintel 
the symbolically represented figures of Horus the Behdetite and of Seth of Ombos 
make a similar offering of length of years, but now the king is pictorially shown in 
human shape and ceremonial attire. It will be noted how ingeniously the sign for 
‘year’ ({ mpt) or, when notched as here, for 'millions of years’ has been used 
throughout the entire height of the doorw'ay both to border the vertical inscriptions 
and to provide an inner margin for the separate compartments. Near the top, to 
both right and left, these m/if-signs end in an inward cur\’e, leaving the two upper¬ 
most compartments open to the centre of the lintel. Here a different treatment W'as 
clearly indicated, and the artistic problem has been solved with an elegance and 
symbolic aptness beyond all praise. The bird-deities Horus of HieraconpoHs {Nkni) 
and the heron-god of Djeba'et (above, p. 31) have been placed upon high perches 
like the Behdetite and Ombite in the centi^ picture, so that their bodies are raised 
to the level of the Winged Disk. Notwithstanding the presence of the words ‘to 
Kha'kauret', with the cartouche w'hich here, as in all the compartments, stands in 
front of the local deity indicating the recipient of the gift, it is to the "Winged Disk 
that 'life* (f) and 'prosperity* ( 1 ) are actually presented.^ Could there have been 
conceived a more telling way of conveying the identity of the Winged Disk with the 
reigning sovereign? That does not, however, prevent the Winged Disk sometimes 
being thought of as distinct from the king and conferring blessings upon him, as 
when we find the accompanying legend ‘the Behdetite, the great god, he 

gives life and prosperity’.^ 1 8 ^ 

bealc or 'nose'; here tht falcon |i at A hieroglyphic sign and a pictun:. So too earllerp under Sesostris I, 
Srrv. xxs* pL II to Cbevder'i article, top right, 

* Wb. fp 193, 4-7. = Sethe, Urkund^ dfT 18. Efyoaiiit, Tmn&tation, i, p, 14, 

^ The lintel of Amcnophis I from Thebes (JEA tv, pi. 4) agrees in this signilicani particular^ 

* E.g. Feme, SU Trmpies, pL la (Amefiophw III). Sifnilarly, N^a^ilk, D^ir A Bafiori (iv), pla, 
together with op. dr (ii)^ pL 43 ^ reproduced here in pL vi, fiff- 3 - 



The hovering falcon likewise often receiving the epithet 'the Behdetite’, the equival¬ 
ence to the Winged Disk might seem to follow mathematically. But here is no question 
of mathematics and logic, but rather one of representational intention and misty 
theological suggestion. In this place it must suffice to stress the obvious fact that in 
the falcon symbol the falcon aspect predominates over the solar, the local over the 
universal, and 1 have also the impression that the relation to the king was one more of 
guardianship than of identity. A more minute investigation of these and the cognate 
vulture symbol* might well prove fruitful, particularly if undertaken m Egypt itself, 
vsThere the orientation of the wails and doorways so adorned could be observed. The 
reason for the choice of each symbol might then be ascertained. For instance, since 
the Winged Disk exhibits the sun flying from east to west, its w'ings bracketing to¬ 
gether, as it were, the Upper and the Lower country, this symbol is evidently most 
suitably placed on the central doorw'ay of a temple with E.-W. axis, and on the eastern 
side thereof. If, how'cver, it should occur on the w'estem side of the doorway, the 
right w'ing would point southw'ards; in that case w*ould the uraeus to the right wear 
the Upper Egyptian crown ? On the other hand, it may turn out that the actual position 
was habitually ignored, and that the artist allowed himself to be influenced only by 
the underlying thought; in that case every Winged Disk, how'ever physically situated, 
would in imagination be conceived of as following the natural course of the sun, and 
the crowns on the uraei would be accommodated to that idea. Again, was the choice 
between the hovering falcon and vulture purely capricious, or was this likewise 
dictated by some physical or conceptual reason ? One can w-ell suppose that in a visit 
of t he king to Memphis from farther south he might more appropriately stand under the 
protection of Nckhbet of El-Kab than under that of Horus the Behdetite, Such are 
a fe'w of the considerations which a student of this topic would do well to bear in mind. 
Even if these questionings yielded merely negative answers, that would in Itself be 
a gain. 

V, The 'hinterland of Behdet’ and the problem of Chemmis 

The inscriptions on the chapel of Sesostris I and on the Karnak cubits mention 
the ‘hinterland of Behdet*, and tve must now inquire what sort of country lay 

to the north of the town. The attentive reader will have observed that mention has 
been made of the idh{ie) ‘marshland' in connexion w ith both Behdet and Sam- 
behdet (pp. 40, 45, 46),..and a temple rite which was performed at Edfti and appears 
to have had specific reference to Amun of Sambebdet was ‘the presenting of papyrus 
reeds and rushes’ (p, 45). The name of the of the XVIIth nome is 
‘Tjar’^ and this, connected with a word meaning ‘cabin’ or the like, conveys nothing 
of interest, but the text accompanying it in an Edfu nome-list nearly identical with one 

* For early examples of the ho'i'eriTig vulture see Borchr, fi, p 3 . 8; p. 89^ fig, 67; 

Ptpi II, ii^ pi. 47; the unusual farm with stmifthi 32 ( — is restored in seveni other pkiesp 

whether rightly may be doubled. At first sight the antithesis of Horua anil Nekhbet seems peculiar^ aince else¬ 
where the opponent of Homs Seth, while Nckhbet had Edjfi as her accepted northern countezpatt. 
The e^lanation, however, obvious; for this particular dealgn bird? were required^ and Horua and Nekhbet 
were birds, while Seth and Edjfi were not. 

* Great Edfu nome-list, RoehcmonCei:Cp Ed/m, i, 335, top, and in the places named in the next note. 


at Denderah spealcs of it as , ^carrying its papyrus 

(mnh, a sjiTionym of ttud?) and its ways hidden in trackless papyrus',* and the follow¬ 
ing idcntiEcation clause—for the sense of this expression see above, p. 35—points 
unmistakably to tbe emergence of Hums the Behdctite, often conceived of as, not a 
winged sun, but a winged beetle,* ‘thou art the youth 

that emerged as the doer of beneficent acts,* who served as the beetle who renew’s the 
birth of royal appearances’ or ‘of cro^vns’. The ‘water' of the nome ft'IX 
appears to incorporate the same word J Anf which 1 have defined as signifv'ing 
a piece of water bordered by marsh or fen;* and here the legend in the notne-lists 
at Edfu and Denderah which has just been used refers to its close proximity to the 
Mediterranean-—‘He brings thee Hensamro with its Great 

Green (i.e. the sea) falling headlong into^ the Grecian isles (Ndw-nhe/)’, Also the 
papyrus swamps existing hereabouts are alluded to in the Ramesside story of the 
Blinding of Truth, where the fabulously large bull that was evidently a simile for 
the land of Egypt itself stood in fsIand-of-Amun (Tell el-Balamun, above, pp. 42 f.) 
and ‘the tuft of its tail rested on the 

papyrus-marshes' (pf 

Thus the ‘backland of Behdet’, stretching to tbe sea not far away, was a region of 
swamps and lagoons abounding in jungle-like growths of papyms and reeds. For 
such country' as this, and particularly for the papyms which w'as its principal charac¬ 
teristic, the Egy'ptiarjs had many terms; that which w'e have just read (/«./, cf, Coptic 
•xoc'y:^ 'papyrus’), if it is preserved in the Biblical 'Sea of reeds’, as we have 

every reason to believe, probably was applied also to the marshes fringing Lake 
Menzalah considerably farther to the east.T But the other term idfttv 

‘papyms-marshes' seems much more closely associated with the XVUth nome. 
Though one cannot go $0 far as to restrict it to that area, it is strange that the Edfu 
texts should so persistently, perhaps even exclusively, connect it with Sambehdet; 
and Just as Behdet and Elephantine are contrasted as the tw*o limits of Egypt, so too 
wc find idhu! and its inhabitants in the same antithesis.^ It was amid such sw'amps 
that tradition located the birthplace of Horus, and tbe pictures of Isis nursing her 

■ Ch., Ed. IV, 35, No, LXVIll = EWmiehen, Ct€gr, Tmekr. iv, tbj (Dendcr^), 

- SciKe (UrgneiiichUf p. 12S} «ven iinB«in«d this fomi Tnight hav« been the onRinal one, but the are 

debnitely those of a bird, not of a beetle, nor does this imnge Mem to been knoiwn at any early period. 

s Driotwi, Ftmillei de Mi^denmod (ifliS), lo*. tua irt (^) tjt, presuttiibly with the mcaninig Vmergins 
as the benefieent eye’, llie Denderah text, which has to gi^'c sn identification for tdathdr, i.e. feminine, 
equaica her with Tphtnis, daughter of Re', which of COutm ia connected with the worship at Sambel^det of 
Onuria-Shu, see above, pp. 43 f. 

* JEA !«ix. 40. 

» Var. Denderah tn for ttt-hf, Blackman ha* shown me that in the Craeoo-Ronun texts often has the 
meaning ’in’. 

* Gardiner, LaU-Egyptian Stmet, p. 35. 

» Rtaifil ChamimHion, aia; for refenmeei tixJEA v, rSh, n. i. Strove {Crijffith StudUi. 369 ff.) makes the 
philolcigically unsound attempt to diacover this w-ord in the famous wurior-clau of the HeimotybicS, which 
would involve its extension to the north-western Delta and to the altogether pTobtcmatial Chetnmis which 
Heliodonu, Attkiitpiia 11, iS. xi. placed them. 

* Bnigseh, Diet, g^ogr- 89 ff,, quotes all the best-knowTi passages. 



infant son amid a clump of papyrus are well known.’ From the Pyramid Texts^ 
onwards the name of the actual place Is given as ih-bit, which later ages 

wrote as Hb and pronounced Khebe or Khebbe;i out of this the Greeks made , 
doubtless with some unconscious recollection of the totally unrelated name of Panon- 
polis {Hnt~Mn, modern EkhmTm) in Upper Egypt, though Hecataeus (fr. 284 apud 
Steph. Byz.) preserves a form Xeiipa, and "Apxjj^is, 'Apxi^s are common persopal 
names in the Graeco-Roman period. Hecataeus (loc. cit.) and Herodotus (it, 156) 
both record that Chemmis was a floating island in the town of Buto, and the latter 
adds that here Leto rrceived Horus as a charge from Isis and hid him from Typhon. 
Plutarch in the De IH 4 e does not mention the Lower Egyptian Chemmis, but speaks 
of Isis as 'going to her son Horus who was being brought up tn Buto’ (ch. 18) and 
in another place (ch. 38) mentions that 'he was brought up by L.eto in the marshes 
round about Buto'.+ Neither do these classical authors name the birthplace of Horus 
nor yet do any others, and when the town of Buto is referred to it is merely said that 
he spent part of his infancy there. 

In Sethe’s hands—and he is not alone in this respect—Buto has become the 'home' 
{Heimai) of Horus, and Chemmis, definitely stated by Hecataeus to be ‘in Buto’ 
{iv Boimit) and clearly implied to be so by flerodotus, has become a separate place 
somewhere in the neighbourhood.^ It is true that the second mention in Plutarch 
and the hesitating alternative in Epiphanius^ lend some slight support to this modifica¬ 
tion, but Herodotus, writing as an eyewitness and full of admiration for the temple of 
^to, is only a trifle less impressed with the island of Chemmis ’beside’ it t6 
«- BovtoI though he failed to see the island floating or moving. In face of such 
evidence it is impossible to doubt that there was a Chemmis in Buto itself, but f shall 
prweed to aiguc that this was not the Chemmis where Horus was traditionally 
believed to have been born. 

The goddess Leto, whose oracle at Buto, much belauded by Herodotus, is mentioned 
also by Strabo (xv«, i, 18), was in Greek mytholo^ the mother of Apollo and Artemis, 
whom she bore to Zeus on the island of Delos. It is usually thought that the identifica- 

‘ AH SMtn to b« late; for oiw at PIiJIm see Maapero, Histoire Andenn^, i, 155. Others, Lanaone, Diisionario. 
P' 37 ^^ p pl' 3*0; Golthiischelf, XUttemifhstilt, pi. 3; for the word in connexion ^ith the birthplace, see 
op. cit., I. aoj; Leps., Toditnbueit, ch, 157,1: .Mariette, DendA^/,, I, 56 a, quoted below, p. 56, n. i. 

* * 7^3 Th}’ mother tsis bore thee in Chemmis'; less direct aJlusions in 1214, zigo. StmilarJy in the 

Cofi^ Texts, below, p. 35. n. 4. Other explicit statements, Mtntmifh ftela, 16S; Spicgelbet^, Sageukreis 
dts Konigf Pettdiestn. p, 14 (R Spttg. 4, 3 f.). In Graeco-Homan epithets of the god himself or of the king 
M equated with him, e.g, Ch.. Ed. lit, 24, 8; w, 247. 17; Id.. Mammhi, ga, la. 

' For this vtkulisation, see ZAS XXX, 113 ft, Since the v-snants (for Edfu Blackman has gi«n a valuable 
mll^on aboi'e, p. 20) sometimes pla« the bee bcfoie the papyrus-clump, clearly for honorific reasons, 
^*e wumcs that the whole name signiftesi 'Papyrus-Jungle of the King of Lower Egjpt', UrgachkAte 
4 However, this presupposes the reading -AW and I do not see how the ending -fl can have disappeared 
s?ut of me pkoe-nnmfr. 

* That were ‘marshes’ in t iiTeneTO,. the later Phthenetic nome (Gauthier, 

AowMf, 148 ff.) la Imown from the Satrap atfsk. Sethe^ 11, Hi, 

• UfgfschichU, 5 i6g. I do not understand how Sethe reconciled this view with his theory mgarding 

Dsmimhur 31 kfn^ south- west of Buto, * 

♦ Expos, HI, 4, , , Hopfner, Fonl«. IV. 6o«, of 51 rmpd riJr Bavri^Av ij rgv WUvvnv 

'Tov ApPtOKpan^v ^ ^ 


tion with her of the goddess of Buto was due to the birth having in both cases taken 
place on an island, but the similar desinence of the two names may also have played 
a part. The form Bovrtlt {or Bwros) given to the Egyptian town-name by the Greeks 
has as its original ‘Pu-tg’, ‘House of (the cobra-goddess) Edj6\ 

or earlier ‘Edjoyet', later pronunciation ‘Eto’J This is not the place to produce proof 
of the well-established localization in the great mound of J»' Tell el-Feta'in,* 

iz km. due north of Shabas and about the same distance to the east of the Rosetta 
branch; the evidence will be given in another work now in preparation.^ Nor is it 
necessary to demonstrate anew that the town originally consisted of two adjoining 
settlements, the early names of which ivere ^ P 'Pc’ and ^ Dp *Dep’. The goddess 
‘lady of Pe and lady of Dep’ is usually referred to by Egv’ptologists as Buto, using the 
same name for both goddess and town; it is true that there is a very late analogy for this 
in Bubastis, but both appellations should be abandoned; for Buto all extant classical 
authors use Leto, and the sole authority for the practice here condemned is the 
geographical lexicographer Stephen of Byzantium, area a.d. 500. We ought to 
accustom ourselves to using the form Edjo, unless the older Edjoyet be preferred. 

The legendary' role assigned by Herodotus and Plutarch to Leto (Edjo) receives 
little confirmation from Egyptian texts before late times. In the earlier periods Pe 
is never mentioned in conneJiion with the birth of Horns, and Khebe is hardly ever 
named in connexion with Pe. In one passage of the Pyramid Texts (zigo) the place- 
names are jvixtaposed, but are evidently contrasted: 

‘Horus goes fonh from Chemmis, Pe wait3(?) for Homs, that he may 
purify himself there’; the second member of the sentence may conceivably refer to the 
childhood in Pe, but only after departure from the birthplace. A Middle Kingdom 
religious text says: ‘Look at this N, the son of Isis, conceived 

in Pe and born in Cbemmis’,^ a sentence which leaves it obscure whether the two 
places were near one another or far apart. Some Nineteenth Dynasty- references 
are of doubtful application: at Abydus^ Sethos I is depicted as being ‘nursed’ (r«w) 
by Nekhbet and Edjo, and a stela of Ramesses II‘ accords to him the epithet ‘nursed 
(mn) by Edjo’, On the Mettemich stela (245-6) and in an important parallel text 
edited by Drioton? a charge to protect Horus b given by Thoth jointly to 
♦J^ '!'■!■ I inhabitants of Chemmis and the nurses who are in 

Pe’, but even here Pe b merely the scene of the nursing, and immediately after 
wards Isis is described as ‘the poor one (var. M who has fled from 

her tow-n’. The Greek authors, as we have seen, stress only the upbringing in Buto, 
and ignore the birthplace. The hieroglyphs of the Graeco-Roman temples bring the 

* ZJlS LV. S9 fT., where it is ri^tly poinwd out that the ol of Bovri^ belongs to ^ pj- in its Lower Egyptian 

form, cf. and Bohairic nofP‘» 'king’. Various substantives from sterns primar w dropped their 

initial conson»u from the carliesi times, and \Vi 4 yf, though often 40 wtiiien with (, was probably one of them. 

» Not to be confused with Tell Far'un (below, p. 58. n. 4>, the site of an ancient town where, curiously enough, 
the goddess EdjS was likewise worshipped. 

* Gardiner, Ancient Egyptiuti Onamattiea, under No, 4^5 “t t 5 n. Am. 

* Lacau. Textes nlisitux, 38, lo-i. ’ Mariette, Abydoi, I, 31, o. 

* Neville, Buimaii, pi. 38. B, 3. ^ Afte. it, 193 f. 


goddess Edjo more prominently into the picture. Beside a Denderah scene' we read 
of Edjo, 'lady of Pe and Dep*, 'tmking shelter 

for her infant amid the marsh~plants (fyA), bringing up her son Honjs in the papy rus- 
marshes’; here Edjo-Leto is confounded with Isis, the mother of Horus, and is no 
longer merely the nurse; the accompanying scene shows the king presenting a papyrus 
plant J ictd to Edjo {TqL iVfdyt)t whose name comes from the same stem for ‘to be 
green*—according to S<^e the cobra-goddess is 'the papyrus-coloured*. At Edfu 
Edjo, lady of Pe and Dep, is protection of Horus in Chemmis*.- 

Elsew'herc tn the same temple Horus is again ‘the son of Edjo*, the text con- 

tinuing^^— ‘whom his mother nurs^ in Chemmis’;^ in a neighbour- 
ing legend Homs is ‘(he) whom his mother bore in Chemmis' and 

almost immediately aftcnvards ‘who was bom in (or “for" ?) Pe’. Much 

more precise are some epithets given at Denderah to the king as Horus, 

‘born in Chemmis, nursed by Edjo in Dep*.’* This evidence 
could be multiplied by scholars more familiar with the late temple inscriptions. It is 
useless to try and reconcile their data. Edjo is sometimes identified with Isis, w'hile 
sometimes apparently she is only the nurse, as hinted also in the epithet 
iwnr ‘lady of the House of Nursing’.® Nowhere is there a clean-cut story such as Hero¬ 
dotus tells ; Egyptian religion delights in this sort of vagueness. As regards the situation 
of Chemmis one has only the general impression that it was somewhere in the northern 
papyrus-marshes and at some distance from Pe (Buto). But what, then, becomes of the 
testimony of Herodotus? To do him justice—and Sethe must benefit by the same 
admission — ^some late passages testify to a Chemmis closely associated with Pe, A 
Louvre papyrus with invocations to Osiris says: ‘Pe is in joy at the sight of thee, 
Dep gives praise in thy presence, Edjo is exalted upon thy head (i.e, as the uraeus 
on the king’s brow) and there are presented to thee the health-giving herbs («j 4) 
that are in Chemmis’.* This is perhaps the most convincing passage, since in the 
composition here quoted the place-names are arranged in roughly exact topographical 
position. So too elsewhere the name of Chemmis is juxtaposed to that of Pe in such 
a way as to render their proximity, real or supposed, practically inevitable.^ Edgar® 
even sought to identify Chemmis with the modem village of Shabah, 3 km. SE. of 
Tell el-Fera’in; all around there is swampy ground, and those acquainted with the 
region do not reject the view that here was once a lake.® 1 am not sure that Shabah 

* Muriirne, 56 a. 

* Ch,| Ed. Ill, 15, 3^ AnoEhrr intcrdtinR fxajfiple of a somewhat Etmilar kiitd^ but appearing to mention 
Pe ^ well (op. cit,, vi, 149, 1), is quoted to me by Fairmaii, but czannot here be dts^imed. 

^ Op. dt.p ]i^ T35, *Son* op. cit.t v, loi^ s. 

* Mflrictte, Dfttderah, Hip 30, t, Howeverp the $mnll bonbontaL legend immediateKy adjoining makea 
Dep the birthplace and Edj& the mother, ta there some comiption here? 

^ Brugseh, DttL 1173, from Armant. P, Louvre 3079, 70 ff, ^ Bmg^hp Diet. to6+. 

^ E.g. Mirlctte, Papyrus ^^£yptUns, 1. pi, 12, 1. 9 = Rituri 8, 9 of Mstspero’a numbciim, 

'Edja comes to thee within Pe. and Honia within Chemmis, presenting to thee sprigs of health-giving herbs 
(fw 5 )p the AD^Iy phylacteries of Homg himseir, Similarly the from the story of Fetubostis and from 

the Mettemich stela quoted above, p. 54, n. 2. and p. 55, n, 7 respectively. 

■ Sm\ xip S 3 ff. Elaborated further by Daressy op. dt- xxvi, 249flf.p but hintastically, 

^ BoU^ E^pt in ihr Clmdcal Gc^grnphm^ zs. 



!s not too far away to suit the description of Herodotus, and at all events the picture 
he conjures up is not one of a secret hiding-place, where Homs could have been kept 
out of the clutches of Typhon, but of ‘a great temple-house of Apollo, and three 
several altars are set up 'within, and there are planted in the island many palm-trees 
and other trees, both bearing fruit and not bearing fruit’. 

Taking all the facts into consideration, must one not conclude that the Chemmis 
in or veo' near Buto was a secondary' creation, established there in order to enhance 
the importance of his later residence ? In favour of this view we possess a highly 
significant passage, the interest of which has been hitherto overlooked. In the Helio- 
politan section of the great Harris papyrus Ramesses HI is represented as saying 
{39, 2-3): 

1 restored Houae-of-Horus-foremost-of-Saacttiaries. I built its walls that were dccaved, I restored 
the noble grove that is in it. I caused it to bloom with papyrus clumps within a Chemmis. 

Though in the last words Chemmis lacks 

the town-determinative o, the allusion to the birthplace of Homs is clear enough, 
and we cannot doubt that Heliopolis thus possessed a reproduction of that sacred 
spot, possibly on a wooded island in the midst of a temple lake j the innermost sanc¬ 
tuary may well have contained the image of Isis nursing Horus in the centre of a dump 
of papyrus. Similarly in the Loeb demotic papyri' there is the mention of a mys¬ 
terious Chemmis in the town of Tihna (Acoris). The Egyptians seem to have 
discovered Chemmis in the most unlikely places, and in that sense, at all events, 
Chemmis was a floating island. A nome-list at Edfu^ which has a dose parallel at 
Denderah^ gives the name l]|^“ Mh ‘papyrus-marshes’ to the territory («c), and the 
name ‘Chemmis’ to the A/nferfand waterof the ill-famed Sethian XlXth 

nome of ^pper Egypt, The same name ‘Chemmis’, likewise determined with 

the sign for water, is accorded by the great Edfu nome-list* to the phte of the Vllth 
Lower Egyptian nome, that of the Western Harpoon, though the other two nome- 
lists just quoted* do not agree with it in this particular. 

So far as I am aware, there is only one passage which definitely removes Chemmis 
from the realm of mythology, and gives it a concrete historical existence. This is in 
the Sixth Dynasty biography of the architect Nekhebu, of which an admirable edition 
has been recently published by Dows Dunham mJEA 3 l\iv, i ff. To quote his trans¬ 
lation of 11 . 3-3, Nekhebu was sent ‘to direct the construction of the /Cfl-mansions of 
His Majesty (Phiops 1 ) in Lower Egypt, and (to direct) the administration; at the 
north Lakes" (and) in Akhbit-of- 

Horus (AkS-Khebe); at the south in the pyramid (called) Menneferpepy’. 
The only topographical suggestion here is that Chemmis lay in the far north, nor 
do we obtain any further due from a subsequent sentence ( 1 . 6) stating, ‘Hb 

> Spiegelbetg, Dit JematiKlttn Papyri Lofb, p. * Ch.. Erf. [v, iSg, under N«. LXXV-LXXVI. 

i DUmidien. Geosr. /wcAr. m. pt. * RochanonteuL, Ed/oa. t, 31a, a. 

• Ch.. op. dt.. IV, *7, No. XXVIII, DQmichcn. op. dt., iv, 113, both with * piece of water called Sfm. 
Set Bni^hin ZAS xvir. 13 ff, for a discussion of the Vflth nome, particuisrly in connexion with the legends 
of ihe Mettemich stela-i 



Majesty sent me tq lay out (?) the canal of Akhbft-of-Horus, and ;to) dig it'. 
Where then was this real Chemmis ? The Chemmite nome mentioned by Herodotus 
(ll, 165) is doubtless connected in some way with his Butic Chemmis, but is not 
mentioned by any other classical authorities, and need not detain us here.' It has not 
hitherto been noticed, so far as I am aware, that at least two passages at Edfu locate 
Chemnois in the XVllth nome of Sambehdet. One of these quoted above, p. 35, 
comes from that list of supplementary' districts w'here Sethe found his Damanhur; in 
view* of all that has been w ritten above concerning this list, its relevance here can hardly 
be doubted. The second^ occurs amid a series of local gods, and Amen-Re« of Sam¬ 
behdet addresses Horus of Edfu, saying, T have come to thee, Horus the Behdetite, 
great god, lord of heaven, J 01 *= ^ bring thee a Chem- 

mis of useful plants, thou being safeguarded and sheltered within them'.^ Even if w'e 
render ‘a Chemmis’, instead of simply ‘Chemmis’, as the next words seem to counsel, 
the reference to the place as somewhere in the neighbourhood can hardly be gainsaid. 
When w'e recollect the insistence on the ‘papyrus-marshes' in connexion, on the one 
hand, with the XVllth nome and, on the other hand, w'ith Horus in Chemmis, the 
Likelihood that Chemmis ought there to be sought becomes considerable. Neverthe¬ 
less, a few allusions like this in a Graeco-Roman temple can only show that such was the 
conjecture or supposition of the local priesthood, and other priesthoods may have held 
different views. The name ‘Iemt(et)-pe^et’ 'Royal-Infant nome, back’of 

the XlXth Low'er Egyptian nome, that of which the capital was at J; Tell Far'un, 
very arbitrarily called Tell Nebesheh by Petrie,* might urge us to push our inquiries 
thither, particularly since the goddess Edjo wras also here at home; but the sole inscrip¬ 
tion which to my knowledge favours the claims of this part of the country Is one in the 
temple of Edfu reading 'the female Horus, 

the lady of I met, the eye of Re^ prominent in Khas-Ha^at, who nurses her son Horus 
in Iemt(ct}-pchct, Edjo’.^ One cannot fail to be struck by the candour of the famous 
New Kingdom hymn to Osiris formerly in the Biblioth^uc Nationale, where Isis is 
said to have made an heir for her husband and to have ^ JA d ^ 

'nurtured the child in solitude, and unknown w'as the place where he was'.^ It is not 
clear whether the last words signify only that the hiding-place of mother and child 
was kept dark from Seth, or whether they constitute an admission that no one knew 
where to look for Chemmis. It has been shown that the place-name is not purely 
mythological; it may be that the locality w'as know'n to the authors of the Pyramid Texts 
and throughout the Old Kingdom, but wras subsequently forgotten. Let us frankly 
confess that a definite decision on the issue is out of our reach. 

' Gauthier, iComej 4 ff. Tbt quesdon it diacuHcd also in my Jlnmnt Egyption Otumoitua under 

No. 415 of On. Am. 

* Ch., op. cit.p vip 51, Nbr XVIIL 

J Bbiikman tpjew tht fioiJ t as for m and referring to is masc.p u he points out above^ p. aop n. A. 

* (^irt)p bound up with Tamif Pari //. The evidence for the idciitiScBtipn U Bummaiized 
once pgain by Darcuy in BaU. ImL fr^ xxx, ff,, and then amazJngLy dismissed in favour of on utterly 
impossible Bitemative. 

^ Ch.p Ed. nt^ 241. 

* BidL IttsLfr. xxxp 743, 



VI, Conclusion 

Nearing the end of this investigation. I am painfully aware of various subsidian' 
questions which have had to be neglected for want of space. It would have been 
interesdng to have studied the transfer of place-names from north to south or in the 
opposite direction: 'Behdet of Lower Eg^-pt’ was certainly at or near Tell el- 

Balamun,* but A J«t® ‘Lo'*’^>' Lg>-ptian Edfu' was Sile-Kantarah ;^ Sambehdet was 
a Lower Egyptian Thebes, as witnessed by several place-names expressing that idea 
in various wraysj^ in the Vlth notne of Lower Egypt the backland.was called fifid 
Le. probably Behdet, Leaving these points for others to elaborate, 1 hasten on to 
my finale, here find it impossible to refrain from becoming mildly euhemeristic. 
In view of the evidence from the royal titles, from the Cairo fragments of the Palermo 
stone, from the Memphite Dramatic text, and from the persistent contrasting of Horus 
the Behdctite with Seth of Ombos,^ I feel compelled to accept the theory of a prcdynastic 
conquest of Upper by Lower Egypt preceding, perhaps by a very' considerable space 
of time, that which gave the final mastery to the Southerners. In the period immedi¬ 
ately preceding the First Dynasty, the capitals were at Pc (Buto) and Nekhen (Hiera- 
conpolis) respectively, and the falcon-god Horus was supreme in both. But our new 
results contradict the notion that the original home of Horus was at DamanhQr. 
30 km, to the south-west of Buto, and it is certain it was not actually at Buto. The 
Egyptians themselves seem to have been conscious that the prominence of Pe was 
secondary; thus much is surely indicated bir the question in Chapter 112 of the Book 
of the Dead, ^Know ye wherefore Pe w*as given to Horus V That god s birthplace 
was fabled to be at Chemmis, at a remote spot amid the northerly marshes which we 
have found it impossible to locate. The legend that made the Butic goddess Ed]6 
(Leto) his nurse, if not his mother, shows a disagreement with the simple tale of Isis 
tending her child among the papyrus swamps, and this again marks the secondary 
character of the connexion with Buto. That Upper Egj'pt once was ruled from Ombos 
is confirmed by the important prehistoric cemeteries at Nal^dah and thereabouts, 
and the Lower Egi^ptian counterpart of Ombos Is Behdet, which we now know to 
have been situated at Tell el-Balamun. , 4 re \vc then to draw the conclusion that here 
was the oldest centre of the cult of Horus, and the earliest Lower Egyptian residence- 
city of w'hich memory has survived? In my opinion such a deduction would be extra¬ 
ordinarily imprudent, and the fact it would seek to establish extremely improbable. 
Is it likely that there was in very early times a powerful and populous town hard on the 
edge of the marshes, a place far more likely to have been the dwelling-place of poor 
and fever-stricken fisherfolk? But if not, how to explain the epithet Behdetite? A 
provisional hypothesis is here offered. At some very early moment Behdet became 

t Cciupled with Sambehtlet -P* iMJtre 3079 = Biussch. Diet, g/ogr. 1069, 11 , Ss-A. In Ch,, EJ. VI, 134, 
7-9, the well-lmtiwn of the Mjth of Honji, it ift deafly ■ Miiea of Separate tontia that ire mentioned, 

diaprov'ing Brugach’i theorj' of the idendtj* with Ttrw (Sil6) which fcillowi it, 

* One reference nll^cei: op- dt., VI, 31, No, XIV. See, too, above, p. aj. 

* Spiegdbeut, Aegyptiifht RamigUumt HM Afua TefUtmmt, 31 fF. 

< That the uidthesii of Horus and Seth cannot date from later than Dyn. I ia proved by the occurrence of 
the queen'a dile 'She who lew Horus and Seth', l.e. who brholdt her husband as the embodiment of these 
two >tods, as early as the reigns of Djer, Petrie, Tvmbt. 11, pi. 27. I^oe. 93, 1 iS, 119. 



known as the northemmost town or village of Egypt, and there, as at several other 
Delta tow'ns, the cult was that of a ^Icon-god. Conceivably the exact place where the 
worship of Horus originated was forgotten or for some reason undehnable, but at 
least it was clear that he was the principal deity of the people who overcame the Upper 
Eg^-ptians championed by Seth of Ombos. The earliest royal titles and the Old King¬ 
dom pictures show a great love of symmetry j I submit as a distinct possibility—no 
more can be claimed—^that *Behdetite^ was taken as the epithet of the nation^ god 
Horus merely to stress his northern origin and to provide a counterpart to r=i| Nbil 
‘Ombite', One great advantage accrues from this suggestion: it would explain—and 
I know of no other suggestion that would—why Behdet is never mentioned in the 
Pyramid Texts, while Ombos is occasionally named, if not as frequently as Pe and 


Two French books that have come to hand rccenUy, after the above article had long been in 
print, render desirable some additions. 

From J. Vandier, La religion ^i^tienne (1^44), 28 f., we learti that the problem of Behdet has not 
Iain dormant during the war-years. Mention is there made of a 'quite recent’ book by Kees entitled 
Der Gotterglaube im alten Agypten., where he sets forth in even greater detail his objections to 
Scthc’s synthesis in Urgerchichte. I translate some sentences from Vandier’s summary of Kees’s 
views: ‘The cult of the falcon was very common in the Delta, as also in Upper Egypt, but each 
falcon preserved its own individuality and, accordingly, was not confounded with an assumed 
national god to ivhom prehistoric Egypt owed a first unification. The Behdet of the Delta (Daman- 
hur), in which Sethe recognized the model for the Behdet of Upper Egypt {Edfu) is not mentioned 
in any ancient text; on the contrary, Horus of Edfu, from Dyn. 111 on, is cited as a god who originated 
in Upper Egypt, and it is certainly he who seived as model for the Horus of Damanhur.’ This takes 
us no further than Kees's position as criticized in my article, Kees could not have known the 
evidence from the reconstructed temple of Scsostris I, but he might have been expected to be 
acquainted with that of the cubits and of the New York sarcophagus, and to have estimated the 
entire matter more justly, Vandier himself, whilst showing some hesitation, in the end {p. jo) 
displays a decided leaning towards Sethe’s theory of a unlfietl kingdom prior to Menes. Neither he 
nor Kees alludes to the testimony from the first line of the Cairo fragment of the Palermo Stone: 
for this see my not^ JEA ill, 144 f. and the later article by Breasted, BuiL xxx, 709 ff. 

Mention tvasmade above, p,z8, n, 1, of a case where the Jubilee festival may have been celebrated 
elsewhere than in Memphis; the allusion was to a scene at El-Kab where, in the reign of Ramises 
III, the shrine of the goddess Nekhbet is being brought by boat to Pi-Rarmesse to participate in the 
festival in question {ZAS xlviii, 47 ff.}. Montet, in his new book Tanis (Payot, 1942), p. 83, fig. 17, 
reproduces a block bearing as dedication the words *He made a great temple of goodly white stone 
of *^,Ayn (i,e, limestone) to the north of the Jubilee mansions {^t hib-sd, see above, p. 27, n. 2), 
(namely) King Uaimarr€*-3etpenre«.' This reference suggests that at least one Jubilee festival of 
Ramesses 11 was celebrated at Tanis, and in combination with the later Ej-Xab scene, tends to 
confirm Montet's and my view that Tanis and Pj-Ra^messe were one and the same. 



fly R, 0 , FAULKNER 

Among the somewhat scanty records of the stormy First Intermediate Period, not 
the least important are the inscriptions left by the nomarchs of the Hare nome- Al¬ 
though their tombs are at El-Bcrshah, most of their records consist of hieratic graffiti 
inscribed in the quarries at Hatnub,' and these tell a tale of conflict with an unnamed 
king. It has been supposed that he W'as an Tntef of Thebes, and that the nomarchs 
of the Hare nome were assisting the Heradeopolitan king against the Southern In¬ 
vaders, but there is reason to think that such was not the case, and that they were 
fighting, not against the Thebans, but against their own PleracleopoUtan overlords. 

The rulers of the Hare nome seem to have been a turbulent family, for an early 
member, one ^Ahanakhtc, though perhaps not openly at strife with the king, asserted 
himself with some vigour in the politics of his day; in his tomb he describes himself 
as *om wh& did justice^ sharp oj tongtte among the quarrelsome, ze/ro spoke tcith his mouth 

and acted teith his hands, watchful of his step among the rtders -/ was a warrior of the 

confederacyif) a possessor of counsel in the council of the off dab on the day of painful 
words'^ It is thus clear that already all was not w ell within the State, but it was under 
a later nomarch, Nehri I, that the friction with the Crown came to a head. In 
his fourth year Nehri W'as still at peace with his overlord, for his overseer of ships 
Netjeruhotpe travelled throughout Egypt from Elephantine to the Delta Hn order to 
perform the business of my lord in the affairs of the Palace*, and spoke of the esteem of 
the Council of State for his master.^ But In the following year armed insurrection 
broke out In the Hare nome. In an inscription of Nehri’s fifth year* his son Kay, who 
appears to have been associated with his father in the government of the nome, tells 
us of his share in the conflict: 7 made ready my troops of young men, / went tofght m 
company with my city, I acted as its [rearguard] in Shedydsha,^ though there was none 
tdth me except my retainers, Medja, Wawat, . . . Asiatics{f), Upper and Lower Egypt 
being united against me, I relumed after a happy success .., the whole of my city being 
with me without loss, I rescued the weak from the strong, I made my house into a tower 
for the fear-smitten on the day of strife,* Kay’s brother Dhutnakhte, who was responsible 
for the religious affairs of the nome, also tells us that he was 'one who acted as its (his 
cit/s) rearguard in Shedyt-sha when every one had fled*^ 

The first of these two quotations affords a fairly clear indication as to the date of 
the war and the identity of the opponent, for Kay tells us that the army opposed to 

* Anihes, Dit FfUframchriften von Hataub, Leipziif. 

^ Newberry. El BmhitK ih pS- 13^ ^ Gr^to 14. * GrAffito 1^. 

» The rneaning of fhe tenn idyi B is far frani cerfain, but in Btiy cft&c. w the Berlin Dkdariary (iai', 567, 1 1} 
has eetfip it mint refer 10 some clearly defined locality where an acrion waa foui^ht, ao that it has been ttcawd 
simply ai i place-name here- * Graffito 17. 



him was drawn from both Upper and Lower Egypt, He could not, therefore, have 
been fighting against the Theban Intefs, who did not control Lower Egypt, nor could 
he have been their ally. It is also not in the least probable that he rose against the 
Mentuhotpe kings, for these were not likely to have left in their wake any nobles 
strong enough to rise against them ; furthermore, as Anthes points out/ the Hatnub 
graffiti are probably close in date to the inscriptions of Asyut, which describe the 
Theban war. The only likely alternative that seems left to us is that the rebellion 
in the Hare nome took place a little before the uprising in the South, and that the 
opponent of the rebels was the Heradeopolitan king. That he was able to recruit 
Nubian troops for his army, and therefore must have controlled all Egypt, is confirmed 
by the d^covery'’ at Asyut, a city most loyal to him, of a roughly contemporarj' wooden 
figure of a Nubian archersuch recruiting would have been out of the question after 
Thebes had rebelled. 

The result of this clash was definitely unfavourable to Nehri, for although he re¬ 
covered the capital from which he had been driven by the royal forces, he was compelled, 
as we shall see below, to disband his army, and a passage from an inscription of year 6^ 
points to a submission to the king, Nehri describing himself as ‘one tcho turned the 
speech of htm tvho would dispute with him and who said to the king what Iw commanded 
him when the day of consultation came*. Nevertheless Nehri and his sons continued to 
boast of their rebellion, and in this same inscription of year 6 the nomarch does not 
refrain from pointing out that he was ‘otte who opened his house to the fear-smitten on the 
strife, ... a fortress within the province to which all folk clung'. 

Subsequent inscriptions are even more outspoken, Nehri's son Kay, in a graffito 
probably to be dated to year 7/ speaks of replacing the troops w ho had been disbanded 
as a result of the rebellion: V raised its troops of young men in order that Us forces^) 
might be numerous, for its troops had entered into the citisens and dwelt in their houses,^ 
and they had gone on no expeditions^ in the time of the fear of the Palace. I saved my city 
on the day of plundering from the sore dread of the Palace^ I was its fortress on the day of 
battle, its shelter in Shedyt-sha.* Dbutnakhte describes his share in the saving of the 
city in similar termswhile Nehri himself, in an inscription exactly dated in his year 7,* 
says; '{I was) a valiant member of the camp, one watchful of [his step everywhere}. When 
the King said “Draw thou up in battle-arrayp behold, / am arrayed also**, the Residence- 
folk had confidence in his might, (But I teas) a fortress in Shedyt-sha to which all folk 
[clung], one at whom the people trembled, the terror of whom was in [the hearts of men?] like 
Sakhmet in the day of battle.* A curious point in the last quotation is the formal chaL 

> Anttwa, op. «t. 92 ff.; ZAS. UX, 100 ff,, wguld date them after the capture of This by the Tbebana, but 
we have just seen raison to reject that view- 

* Scharff, Dit hittarvrhe Abffhmtt dn LthrefOr KSnig Mrwikare, 21, 

J Graffito ao. 4 Gtafliito 24, 

' I,«. had become ordinary citizeas and lived quietly at home; for tk n 'enter into' a state (hem of rilizenahip) 
comp^ rif n iwt ‘come to Rcicf (lit. ‘enter into trouble'), Pri$u 11,13, This is not an «rfy enmple of billeting! 

‘ A mJt- m: the expeditions wntre presumably to quarries at Matnub, where the soldim, as uaual, would 

provide the nHJgh Ubotir. 

Graffito aj, 1 Graffito ij. 

* For this expression see JBA, xn, 213 finK 



lenge issued by the king to his rebel opponent. We are reminded not only of the 
challenge which the Ethiopian king Piankhi ordered his army to deliver to the rebel 
Tefoakhte,* but also of the complaint in The Instruction for King Merikar^' regarding 
the Asiatic raider: V/e announces not a day in fightingt Uke one mho undertakedf?) the 
stfppression{?) of conspirators*^ Anthes interprets the king's speech as referring to joint 
action against a common foe*—in his view the Thebans—but that is surely to mis¬ 
understand the situation entirely. The hostile note struck in the other graffito of year 7 
quoted above,*/ saved my city on the de^‘ of plundering from the sore dread of the Palace* ^ 
and an inscription of year S'* which describes Dhutnakhte as *a valiant citizen teho 
struck dotvn the forces of the king^ on the day of battle*, make it perfectly clear that Nehri 
was in arms against his sovereign, so that the king's words cannot have been a summons 
to a trusty subject but were a challenge to a foe; furthermore, we have already seen 
reason to believe that the Hare nome was at odds with Heracleopolis. It is true, a& 
Anthes points out, that before Nebri goes on to speak of the royal challenge he describes 
himself as *a friend of the Mng who has no equal, a man to whom the heart is opened; he was 
brot^ht to consult with the Court unknown of men, and the Residence-folk were content 
with the counsel which be spake*,^ but the contradiction is readily explained if Nehri is 
now officially reconciled with his king, but in order to magnify himself in the eyes of 
his subjects cannot refrain from boasting of his rebellion against that same king in the 
past. That all the above-quoted passages refer to the single campaign which took 
place in year 5 is clear from the recurrent allusions both to Shed)'t-sha^ and to 
the protection afforded to the populace. If tve are right in dating this rebellion 
in the Hare nome not long before the Theban war, it was just as well that the 
Heracleopolitan king succeeded in quelling it promptly and in becoming reconciled 
to the rebellious nomarch, for a hostile principaUcy' in the rear of the nomarchs of 
Asyut at the time of the Theban attack would have cut their communications with the 
capital and have paralysed their resistance to the Southern advance. The point at issue 
between king and nomarch is nowhere stated, but it is worthy of note that Neftri does 
not repudiate the nominal sovereignty' of the reigning king, how'ever obstinately he 
may have opposed the actual exercise of the sovereign power. In this respect he differs 
from the Intefs of Thebes, who from the moment of rebellion assumed the full royal 
style and laid claim to the throne of all Egypt. 

■ See op. cit. MQ, ff- * L- M. irans!. GaxduMT, op. cit. r, 30. 

* HQirtuh, p. ^ * Cmffitti 

5 N4s n jAip lit. *fl vdianl dtijeen of dub-jn-fftct-of the forces of the king"; the estprcaiion 

I ^ apparently unique, hot its sense » clear. 

* Grs^to 35. PtiraKs qf shnilar tertor also used by Dbutniikhlc in the abovc-rncrttionfcd gralHto of year 8. 

f Anqtheri unquoted, reference to Shedyt-sha occurs iji the gralhto of year S. 

(* 4 ) 



The scene shown in PI. vu comes from tomb no. 68 at Thebes, which belongs to 
a prophet of Amun named Nespnefrhor and dates from the Twenty^hret Dynasty. 

The scene is painted on the extreme right-hand comer of the south-east wall and 
appears to have been the last part added to the decoration and never completed. 
There are no outlin^ and the picture is merely blocked in with coarse, indefinite brush- 
marks as if painted in haste. Almost the entire design is in yellow on the whitish back¬ 
ground. The vessels before the cows are grey with a white substance on top. out of 
which grey leaves emeige. The necklaces round the necks of the cows arc also grey, as 
is the loms-flower in front of the man. He is red and wears a white robe, over which a 
panther s skin has now either disappeared or w'as never completed. The ties of this 

can be ^en behind his shoulder. The woman is coloured yellow and probably held 
3 menil in one hand. 

Behind the couple there is a $er]es of similar rough, mdehnite paintings of store- 
houses containing Amun barks and statues. It may be that the figures are standing in 
some sort of building indicated by the vertical and horizontal lines. On the other hand, 
the n^ of yellow surface over their heads could have served as the background for an 
inscription. This would be in keeping with the style of the period, but does not explain 
the vertical lines. 

The cattle-stalls are elaborate in plan and consist of three compartments, in the inner¬ 
most of which the cow stands. The curious paling(?) down the centre of the first 
ch^ber is difficult to interpret—it can surely not represent a stairway. The round 
objects may be drinking-troughs. A doorway, with both leaves open, leads from this 
into the third chamber, where the animal is tethered by a Gori attached to the necklace 
or menit. One end is fastened to the foreleg and the other to the side of the stall. The 

yellow' rectangles in front of their heads were perhaps intended as the background for 
a text. 

The cow in the centre shows no trace of fl/e/-featheis, but the one above her seems 
as if she might have borne them. There is no sign of the tethering-cords on the lowest 
COW' ^unl^ the blob of yellow paint on her necklace was the beginning of it. 

No similar picture, so far as I know, has come to light in other Theban tombs. 

Plate VII 


(« 5 ) 


Egyptology has suffered heavy losses of late, and nowhere have they been more 
sensible than in the field of demotic and Coptic studies. The death of W. E. Crum 
removes a man who certainly ranked as the leading Coptic scholar of his generation. 
Bom on July 22, 1865, the eldest son of Alexander Crum, of Thomlebank, Glasgow, 
educated at Eton and Balliol College, Oxford, whence he graduated in 1888, he 
developed even as an undergraduate a taste for Egyptology', which he studied first at 
Paris, mainly under Maspero, and aftenvards at Berlin, under Erman, to whom he 
always felt that he owed his real teaching, with whom he retained a lifelong friendship, 
and to whose elder son (kilted in the last war) he stood godfather, ft was at Berlin that 
he decided definitely to devote his energies to Coptic, Among his fellow pupils in this 
subject was Steindorff, with whom he was to collaborate later and with whom also he 
maintamed an intimate friendship. Having once taken up Coptic in earnest, he was not 
long in realizing the need of a comprehensive and up-to-date Coptic dictionary, and for 
that great and arduous enterprise, to which he devoted the larger part of his time and 
no little of his resources, all his chief studies were in some degree a preparation. 

The Coptic dictionary', which marks an epoch in that field of study, will keep his 
memory alive as long as men retain an interest in Egyptology'j but it is verv far from 
being his only memorial. A bibliography of his wrork appeared in JEA xxv, 134-S, and 
some additions to this appear below'. 1 need not, therefore, recapitulate his publications 
here; even without the great dictionary they would be a most impressive achievement, 
ranging as they do from brief articles and reviewrs to bulky and laborious volumes. 

It is, however, not so much of the scholar as of the man and the friend of nearly 
forty years standing that 1 would speak; for most of Crum’s work was to me alien 
ground. Those who knew him personally will understand what a gap his death means 
to his friends and how hard they find it to realize that his virile and forceful personality 
is removed. Virile and forceftil it was, but at the same time singularly lovable and, for 
all his learning and brilliant ability, fundamentally simple. His masculine intelligence 
was wedded to a feminine sensitiveness and an exquisite courtesy. As an undergraduate 
he was an ardent musician, and he retained his love of music always, though he ceased 
to play his once beloved violin. He was an omnivorous reader, and read always with a 
critical and alert attention. A man of scrupulous rectitude, with a high sense of duty 
and Utterly loyal to his friends and to his ideal of accurate scholarship, he w'as alwavs 
ready to assist a colleague and to extend a helping hand to a younger or less experienced 
scholar. Simple in his tastes and an abstemious liver, he expended on the interests of 
learning resources which some would have devoted to self-gratification; a naturally 
early riser, he was regularly at work at an hour when many men situated like him would 
have been enjoying the luxury of a comfortable bed. Withal he was of a remarkable 



modest}'. Others than I must often have listened with an inwavd amusement to his 
depreciation of his own achievement. 

This apologetic attitude to his own work made doubly welcome any recognition it 
received. The great dictionary was to have been a Berlin publication, a scheme ter¬ 
minated by the war of 1914-18, and the University of Berlin conferred upon him an 
honorary Ph.D. Even more welcome to him was the DXitt. given to him by his own 
University, He was a Fellow of the British .Academy, and only a few days before his 
death he learned with pleasure that he had been elected a Foreign Member of the 
American Philosophical Society. H. I. Bell 


1904. Review in Lit. Centra&latt, g Sept. 1904, of Leipoldt’s Sckenate uott Atripe. 

Review iti OLZ 7, col, 446, of I. BaJestn, Searr, BibL Fn^m. Copto-Safadica, Err, 
Aottnw Testammtam. 

1940, A Bmhndric Word, in JfBA 26, 156"?* 

1941. Review in JBA 27, 179-81 of Hebbelynck and van Lantschoot. Codices Coptics Fa/i- 

cans, T. t 

1942. An Egyptian Text in Greek Characters, In yEA 28, 20-31. 

1943, Review ta yTS 44, nos, 173-4, PP* * 32 - 8 , of Worreir* Coptic Texts in the Unhierrity of 

Michigan CoUecHon. 

Copstk Anecdota, mJTS 44, nos. 175-6, pp. 176-82. 

Note. A portrait of W. E. Crum will be found in JEA 25, PI, xii.—Eo. 

4 : 





* 4 * 



Plate VlII 



Though a member of the Egypt Expiration Society since 1898, Sir Herbert Thompson 
took little public part in its affairs. He serv’ecl on the Committee from 1901 to 190S; but 
he made less than a dozen contributions to Xh^Jmtrml, and he delivered, I believe, only 
one lecture to our members. Yet his name will ever be honoured by us, not only for 
his distinction as a Demotic and Coptic scholar, but also for his unobtrusive generosity 
to our Society: no rnan could be more readily counted upon for a donation to our 
enterprises, whether in the field or tn publication; and his gift of all his Egyptological 
books (other than Coptic and Demotic) at the end of the last war may be said to have 
provided the nucleus of our library' as it now exists. If his reticence, so typical of the 
man, has resulted in Thompson being almost unknown to the majority of our mem¬ 
bers—and to many of the present Committee—this is the more excuse for the personal 
note in this brief account. His Egyptological career can almost be comprised in a 
summary of hb publications. 

Thompson came belatedly and by accident to Egyptology'. He had spent some years 
at the Bar, but was not happy there. He turned from it to Biolt^* (the choice of 
subject was his father's)* and studied at University College, London. Within a short 
time he had so overstrained his eyes that he was forbidden to use the microscope. It 
was then that a chance request from Flinders Petrie for a report on some skeletal 
remains from Egypt roused his interest in the studies in which he was to become pre¬ 
eminent. He was then forty. F. LI. Griffith and W, E. Crum were teaching at the 
College, and after a preliminary grounding in hieroglyphics and the earlier stages of 
the language he began specializing in the two branches of the study in which they 
were the masters—Demotic and Coptic. A year or two later he spent part of an exten¬ 
sive visit to Egypt at Sakl^ah with J. E. Quibell and subsequently edited the Coptic 
Inscriptions in the third volume of Qulhell’s publication of his excavations. 

This was the only occasion of his visiting Egypt and of his taking any part in field¬ 
work. But beginning with the joint publication with Griffith of the Demotic Magical 
Papyrus of Leiden and London (1904-7) he proceeded to publish in the next forty 
years a notable body of Coptic and Demotic texts,-® the most Important of which was 
the (Demotic) Siut Archive, W'hich appeared when he w'as over seventy. Nor was his 
contribution to Egyptian studies confined to his owm editions of texts. In about 1930 

' Sir Hejin^ Thompson, Bart., the distinguished surgeon. 

^ Fairly evenly divided between the two fields; after the Demotic MagicAl pApyrua there followed: The 
DmotU Fapyft in W. M, F+ Petrie^ Gmth and Rifrh (1907) ^ The Coptk {Sahidk) Ferjiow of Cettain Bcoki of 
the Old r«lrn«rttf (190S): the Coptic ij^scTTpnons ftarni already referred to (1909); A Coptk Palimptett 

in the Sahidk Ditdeei (1911>; the Drmr>fir Texii and Coptic Texts in Ththan Qstroca (1911); The Gospef 
cf St^ John accordirtff fo the Bitrlie^i Coptic Manmrnpt (1924); Ma^kai Texft from a BUinpiml Popy-rut in the 
British Museum (with H. h Dell and A. D. Ncsct), and The Coptic Version 0/ iite Acts of the Aposiks and Use 
Pauline Epistles in theSohidk Dialect F^uwiYy Arekweffam Sivt from Papyri in the Briiiih Museum 

(1934); and Tim Demotk Self-Dedkations, JEA xx%l (1941)1 bS-yS. 


he completed for the British Museum a MS. Handlist of the Ocmottc Papyri in the 
Egyptian and Assyrian Department. His assistance in the Anal stages of Crum's 
Coptic Dictiojutry received a special acknowledgement from its author. He made a 
valuable preliminary study of the important find of Coptic writings of Mani, a part 
of which w’as subsequently published by Allberry. And there can have been few 
students working on Coptic or Demotic during recent years whose published results 
do not owe something to direct consultation with Thompson, 

It is significant that he came late to the work in which he made his name^ and w'ould 
have retired early from it if he had had his way. His gift of his Eg>ptologicaI library' 
to the Society was made with the intention of a retreat from London to the country 
(which he achieved^ and a return to the reading of the Classics, But the demands made 
on his scholarship, alike by the unexpected appearance of Important documents which 
no one else was competent or willing to edit, and by his colleagues’ requests for help 
in their own researches, kept him at Egyptian studies for another twenty years. And 
though during the present war, w'hen he w'as over eighty years old, his mind was still 
vigorous enough to lead him to embark on a study of Magy'ar, it was to his earlier 
interests that he mostly turned — the Greek and Latin writers, medieval history', 
Icelandic, the literature of music and musical scores, Italian authors, and Classical 

Nor w'ere those interests confined to the study. He had been an enthusiastic attendant 
at the Theatre, Opera, and at concerts. He had travelled much in Europe, and for 
many years regularly spent a long holiday in Rome. His father entertained a great deal 
in his London house and there Thompson made friends with many of the most distin¬ 
guished figures of the latter half of the nineteenth century. He was fond of the country, 
knowledgeable about natural history, and a tremendous walker. Walking largely 
provided the opportunities for bis great delight in and knowledge of architecture. To 
all these activities he applied an able and well-trained mind, a remarkable memory', a 
sensitive judgement, and a practical and business-like efficiency. But he remained 
essentially a student and a dilettante by nature. Only a strong sense of duty constrained 
him to the discipline of forty years’ preoccupation with Egyptology'. 

The splendid breadth and depth of Thompson’s culture, coupled with his legal and 
scientific training, lent wisdom and balance to his published w'ork. After Griffith died 
he was without question the leading demotist of his day', and among the first few' 
copticists. Most of his editions of texts will remain standard works as long as the 
subject is studied. But in no sense can this be said to have been his first love, and the 
true quality of his learning was exhibited to better advantage in fields in which he was 
under no obligation to claim professional standing. And for those who knew him well 

even the charm of his scholarship came second to his rare and lovable personality_ 

f^tidious, courteous, generous, self-effacing to a fault, devoted to his friends, and of a 
singular unselfishness not less in small matters than in large. 

S. R. K, Gla^tville 

( 69 ) 


coNSTirurio ANTomNiAm 

By A. SECR£ 

H. I. Bell in JEA xxviir{i943), 39-49 reviewed verj'faith Bully A. Segtk, Note sull’ edit to 
di Cartu^alla in Rend, Pont. Acc.^ x\'i (1940), 181-214. His review touches upon only 
the hrst part of the article, pp. 181-97, tieaHng with the implications of the grant of 
Caracalla in the sphere of public law. 

Bell disagrees with the main point of my study even when it embodied opinions 
which have hitherto been unchallenged, as, e.g,, in the case of the dcditician condition 
of the Egyptians. Often Bell shows even more scepticism than a genuine disagreement. 
Such a high authority' as Bell deserves a reply. Possibly this answer may induce him 
to formulate his doubts more vigorously and to attempt a reconstruction of the whole 
matter on the basis of his own assumptions. Such a reconstruction w'ould be the best 
proof of the soundness of his opinions. Meanwhile I feel that no vital point of my 
article has been affected by the criticisms of Bell.' A fundamental difference exists 
betw'een me and him in the interpretation of the political condition of the different 
classes of the inhabitants of Egypt under the Roman rule. 

Bell asserts (i) that all the inhabitants of Egy'pt, except the citiaens of the Greek 
towns and possibly some particular categories of Greeks, were Aegypiii; (2) that the 
metropoUtae who paid the reduced were Aegyptii like the mere laagraphou- 


1 divided the inhabitants of Egypt into (ij) citizens of the Greek towns; (ft) metro- 
politae\ (6^) some particular classes of Greeks; (c) Egyptians, genuine Aegyptii Im- 
graphoumenoi, dedUicti. I considered the categories (ii), (6), (i') as Greeks, (e) as 

It may be useful to emphasize that in the Greek towns and in the metropoleis prob¬ 
ably the bulk of the population was often EgyTJtian, laograpltoumetioi or villagers. The 
census d^e^v a distinction between the Egyptians and the better people.^ 

The assumption that the metropoUtae were Egyptians and not Greeks and that the 

^ Bell U surely right Cpp. ff.) where he asserts, on tkt ha&i$ the evidfnet coUreted by Biirketmann 
Ardriv IK thai the rti^tropoliia^ airo wicre a parti-cular of th-c meiropolitaf^ 1 supposed 

ttTonjfly that all the mflropoHiat were yir^paoxov. Trobfiibly the higher class of the mtiropitliiaf had in 
this way an easier access to the hmores- In Alesutniitia all the amvl appear to have been aird This 

cairection does nof change anything in the cliuiification of the rngtropoittat in a diiferent class from the 

* Wallace, Tdjcdfton, p. tzl says; Vhy the receipts for the payment of the poU-tax at the rate accarded to 
the citizens of the metropolis should be found in so many of the vdli^ges and towns of the nottie is a puzsle'. 
Mttropoitiat^ did not necessarily mean persons living m the metropolii. Metr^polime could live in ihe villas 
of the nocnep as well as nubide the nome. 



metropolitae were too fine a people to be deditidi led Bell to the conclusion that the 
Egyptians and consequently the mere Eg^'ptians were not deditmiJ 
I do not quite understand how far Mr. Last shares this view. Bell and Last find 
that my view that the Egyptian laographoumenoi were deditidi, formulated op. cit. 
182 If., is based on a faulty syllogism.^ The opinion that Egyptians were deditidi, 
however, is not based on my syllogism, but on the syllogisms of P. M. Meyer, Wilcken, 
Gino Segr^, &c., and it is based on the texts quoted op. cit. 181 ff. The onm pmbartdi 
that the Egyptians were not deditidi falls upon Bell, and his demonstration based on 
the assumption that the meiro^liiae were Aegypiii is far from convincing. The second 
major point on which Bell differed from me originates from the doubt whether the 
laograp/iia was paid after the C.A. by the Egyptian metropolitae as well as by the mere 

The payment of the laographia is connected with the much more important point, 
that the grant of Caracalla did not imply a grant of Roman/w/f/enma {Rend, Pont, Acc. 
XVI, 198 ff.), ivhich I may also call ita Itaiicum. 

The reasons why I assert that the laographia was paid after the C.A, arc: 

(a) the evidence of the texts;* 

(h) the incontrovertible existence of the iributum capitis in Syria before and after 
the Cons tit ado Antoniniana'^ 

(c) the whole fiscal policy of Caracalla. 

’ Jones. Jixvi <1936), following the eenci^l opinion fp. 188. no. 29 I misquoted Him), supposed 
the to br but lip add* further that the Jnhabimnt* of those pro\niiE:c& i^vhkh hke Egypt 

(and it may be added Cappadocia and others! were administered on burcHucraijc lines did not rctixivc autonomy 
and therefore remained permanendy deditidi. t think on the basis of the well-known tent* quoted on p, iBi f. 
that only the Egyptian* were dedititii. 

Jones further, p, 233, supposed the to be d^diitrii until the inuoductlon of the city councilfi by 

Severus, I agree With Bell that thin ingenious and plausible theory^ k not fully convincing. 

M do not quite u^demand the faul tines* of my syllii^sm and why J did not undemtand the meaning 
of Gaii^ r, 26 on p. 1S2. However, the faulty syllogism and the misinlrrpretation of Gaius did nor cause me to 
epart from the generally accepted view that Egv-ptians were dfdrtkii and th*t they were not granted Boman 
citizciiship directly. 

I do tint see impiicatioiu of Bell, p. 46. on the wilis of the tnetrcpolititr, Egyptian* and meirt^itat 
made the lun^ is no contrtdiclioo between Ulp. xx, 14 refening to the incapacity of the 

u for making wills and ihe capacity of the ^g^ptians for making wills according to 

the Graeco-Eg>ptian law. 

*^The tTibut^ tapitfs was not connected with the dedlrician condition; therefote the metroteJitat were not 

iti The least dediticii becattac they paid a reduced hogmphm. 

■» Thwtfofl, p. t 34 and p. 413. gh-es the foUowinji evidence for the pa>Tnent of the tnographia 

after the C. 4 .: O. Theb, 86 from Tavp. ( } and dated a,d. 2t3, S.B. 5677 ffWii Hermopolis Magna and dated 

j ff**" ’ ('he presence of the .^ureJii in this ost«kon 

and m Thfb, 86 ^ms to prelude an earlier date (p. 4t3)J. F. R^i.-Geom, IV, 20. a collector's detailed report 
ot collections of the poll-tai (ifar ai^Spa Aooypa^for dated a.d. 223) cominR fiwn Corphetu in the Heraclcoiwliie 
nome and including ^ ts*pa>ei5 who were temporarily absent. Moieoyer. the metrppoltt^*, until the age of 
Dtocletum. were called the nutropohtae St^€,td&paj(tuH in the Oxyrhynchite nome and ciodWwioi in the 
HcimopDlite nome. ! do not consider aucccssfiti the attempts of Bell to invalidate the evidence 
" LTIpianu*. df cfnsibut (written under the reign of Elagabalus, Fittig, ram. p 075 Z) l 

ts, 3, actaiem m censendo significare ne«we est. quiaquibusdam aetas tribuit, nc tributo wiereniur- veluti iii 
a quaimordecim wnts masculi, a duodceim feminae, usque ad seiragestmutn annum tributo capitis 
obligwnir . shows tlut the raptlafio was paid in Syria after the GA. Two other vHiice* mav be of some use 
few the capimifo m Syna; Paul. D. L, ij, S. s 'Divus Antoninus Antioebenses eolonos fecit ssJvis tributis* 



ft is a priori unbelievable that the C.A. could liave abolished the iributum capitis. 
As will be shown in the forthcoming essay on Byzantine economy II, Bysantiont ^944, 
the laographia in the first and second centuries, measured in purchasing power, was 
as important for the Roman budget as the land tax. At the time of M. Aurelius and 
Septimius Sever us owing to the declining purchasing power of the Egt’ptian drachma 
the laographia amounted in purchasing power to about one half of the land tax. The 
deficit of the budget (in purchasing power) was replaced partially by other taxes and 
particularly by the annona. 

Caracal la, who', according to Dio Cassius, bestowed Roman citizenship upon every¬ 
body in order to increase the entries of the Esc us W'ould not with a stroke of the pen 
have renounced the capUatio not only in Egypt but in Syria, in Palestine, and in every 
place where a tribatum capitis might have been assessed. 

Therefore the famous sentence [Tramw yoww TtwAtTeufiJaTtutf may be under¬ 

stood by the FLscus as salvis iributis. 

After the C.A. all the Egy'ptians became Aurelii,' but the Aurelii Egyptians rcjnained 
Egjyidans and were considered as such, as show'n by P. Giss. 40, [1 (215), i, tb ff,— 
W. Cbr. 

Possibly Bell may be right in supposing that Caracalta w'as not so affected by constitu¬ 
tional scruples as I supposed when I suggested that the abolition of the status of dediticius 
might be a prim to the grant of the citizenship. Moreover 1 had already supposed that 
the Egy'ptian soldiers could become Romans directly when granted honest a niissio,^ 

The third main point of difference between Bell and me lies in the theoiy' of the 
double citizenship after the C.A. 

I considered the e.xjstence of tw'o Roman citizenships, a general one which, mostly, 
had implications in private law, shown in the second part of the article, pp. 198-2[4; 
the other, Roman citizenship, the Roman politeuma, possibly called ius lialicutn by 
the Romans. Bell seems to deny this duality. Military diplomas which grant the 
soldiers of the awdlia citizenship after the C.A. show', howrever, that as a rule the 
Romanized peregrinuSf the Aurelius, was not a full Roman citizen .* 

refers to a grartt of Cancalle whj4:h may be dated between a 15 and iiy [sec Dio LXXVilt. ao, i and N, H. Miller. 
CAHt Jcit, 49)' Andoch ti'tis eiviUa tibera, Flin. N.H. V. 79. Chnm. Patth. 354 f. ed. Oind. (Benzini^r PW. 
i.v. * Antiocheia', 244Z fT.). Hence I do not know if the eMtnption from the tributum fapitif paid by the Antiin 
fkentes was applied to the fuU citizens of .Antioch or, u mote probably, to the Syrians living in Andoch > Those 
possibly had become lelim eoiemarii and sdll paid the tributum r^tni. A erant of the condition of Latimu 
eoloniariu* did not necessarily imply eaempdon from the tributa as is shoaTi by Paul. D, L, i j, 8, 7 ^Dlvua 
Vtspasianus Caesarienscs colonos fedt non adlecto ut et itiria Italia essent, sed tributum his cerriisit capitis, 
sed divuB Titui etiam aoltim immune factum interpretatui est'. The ettizena of Caesarea, the capital of tudaea 
with a mixed population of Greeks and Jews (Praenke), PtV, i.v. ’Caesarea", 192] if.), were probably con¬ 
sidered as ooATtw. Caesarea and Aciia Capitolina, Dip. D, l, i, 6, had not been granii^l iur Jtttiifvm (A. v. 
Premerstcin, Sut ItalUitm, SW, X, 1245J, These two passaijea of Paulua show that a Lalinut eolmtutritu paying; 
the tribittum iapitit before the C.A. went on paying the capilatio after the C.A. if not granted tut Italicum. 

• A Segrt, Riv. difit, Liv (1926), 474 ff. ; De Sanctis, ibid. 496. ^ Read. Poat. Ate., xvi, 190 f. 

* A. H. Jones, JRSt xxvi (1936), 218, ihinka, incorrectly, that (hey were barbari serving in the auxilia. Soldieta 
who served in the piaciorian and in the urban oohorta were granted caaubtum with women peregrim itirif, A. S^rt. 
Rend. Pont, vfrr., ivu, 169. I think that these women were peregRttoe as far ns their poiiteuma was concerned. 
Potiteyma affected the fotTH&ufin even after the C.vf. 

lo Rh. dipi. UV (1926), 484 I had already shown that in IGR, ill, 90 Gains had been granted Roman 



Roman citizenship is a direct consequence of the fact that 
the C.A. did not alter the constitutional status of the cities. This was radically reformed 
by the provbions of Diocieti^ taken in the years about a*d. 297^^ 

At the end of his review Bell (p. 49) further formulates his doubts: ‘There is a good 
deal to be said for Segre’s view that the Aurelii were citizens sui. generis, but it do^ not 
clear up the as yet unsolved problems of poU-tax in the third century’. 

I thought I had made clear that the Romanized peregHnt who did not receive the 
Roimh ^fileuma were still considered as belonging to their owm poHteuma, The 
implications of the C.A. as far as private law is concerned had been shown in the 
second part of the article on the edict of Caracalla and in a following article still un¬ 
published on the literal contract where the relations betw'een the instrumentum and the 
sUpumUQ are investigated. 

UTiile I am very grateful to Bell for having reviewed an article not easily accessible 
to British readers, I confess that I am not convinced by his views (a) that the Egyptians 
of the metropoleis were Aegyptii, {b) that the Aegyptii were not deditidi, (c) that the 
hographta was abolished by Caracalla, {d) that the Aurelii did not need the grant of a 
Komsji politcuma to become: full RoitiRFi citizens- 


By H. I. BELL 

I AM ver>- glad that Prof, Segre has replied to my article, as it is desirable that the 
important and very puzzling questions involved should be thorougUy discussed but 
I have r^ly nothing essential to add to what I said before and therefore cannot respond 
to his wish that I should formulate my opinions ‘more vigorously’. Since, however, 
he completely imsunderstands me on several points and therefore, inadvertently, mis^ 
represents my viewSp 1 should like to correct him on certain details^ 

(i) In the first place, he is not justified in stating that in what 1 said of the deditidi 
I opposing ‘opinions which have hitherto been unchallenged*~a statement which 
i ri hard to reconcile with his own remark, Rend. Pont. Acc., xvi, r88, note 29 
where he says, quite mcorrectly, that Jones ‘segue ropiniotie generale errata [the italics 
mine] che gli egiziani non erano deditidi perche ricevono la dttadinanza romana’. 
There is, it 15 true, a possible ambiguity in the use of the word deditidm. If it is 

by the divm Ajit<«iln« with dl the hvnoure of the dti«^,hip. This wis effected sfter 

' The MholMS in the *emw« interpreted wAi'twhc aa ew,- 

status of the ana. held that thr C.A. did not touch the (see e g M 

Ihr. R^. U92d, 306 , n. 5). A. H. M, Gr^k Gty, 194c. ^.,4, 

grant of Ron™ dtaenship by CaraMlla in a.d. it- should presumably in theory hate raised ,11 S ddes 

S e «id p. 173 ‘The of d,e setend dticJuiereby 

TViTfi tnfi Dcciimc jifid locfll citiz^ruHiD n'lu i .. 

it U probable that before the Conititutio AnttnuniaHa onlv dtizciu could be maidstmils’^hd 1^ 
imp«ed 00 all resident.: the Jews crenpidned that in Gte;k 

After the Ci?flifiliitrbj4«f4jnfH»jn«* this last distuiciionlai»ed’,&c A H M lone, nor 



taken to mean, a$ in Gaius i, 14, 'hi, qui quondam adversus populum Romanum armis 
susceptis pugnaverunt, demde vieti se dediderunt\ then obviously the Egyptians were 
dediticii; but so were the Greeks, so vvere all inhabitants of provinces which had been 
conquered by force of arms. It is surely obvious that I was throughout using the word 
in the sense postulated by Segre, on the strength of the passages he quoted, for Ihe 
period of the C.A, and stated by me on p. 39 of my article, namely cives mtiim certae 
ewitatis. In this sense I had, with everybody else, supposed the 'Egyptians' to be 
dediticii until the appearance of Bickertnann's Das Edikt des Kahers Caracalla in 
P, Giss. 40. He convinced me at the time that the 'Egyptians' could not be dediticii 
of this kind; and the whole purpose of what I said on this theme was, not to assert 
dogmatically that the ‘Egyptians' were not dediticii (surely my remark in the summary, 
‘the case is less clear with regard to the question whether “Egyptians" were dediticii. 
Personally 1 incline to doubt it', should have shown Segre this), but to register my 
feeling that neither Segre’s arguments nor the more cogent ones of Jones had for roe 
invalidated the force of Bickermann’s reasoning. 

(a) The most extraordinary of Segre’s misunderstandings is his treatment of my 
^iews on the poll-tax. He states that my attempts 'to invalidate the evidence’ for the 
payment of this after the C.A, are not successful. I made no such attempts; the very' 
evidence adduced by him from papyri and ostraca in support of his view was all of it 
cited by me as proof of the same view! My intention in that part of my article was to 
call attention, not for the first time, to the curious paradox that, whereas it is quite 
certain that the C.A, did not mean the abolition of the poll-tax, the abundant stream 
of receipts for this tax suddenly dries up after Caracalla, Before him we have a very 
large number of such receipts; after him only two receipts, one return of tax-payers, 
and a few indirect references, of which those which mention ^ 1 

pointed out, are not necessarily proof of the continued existence of poll-ta.x. There is 
certainly a mystery here, which requires explanation; and 1 had hoped that someone 
with more knowledge and leisure than 1 possess would undertake the necessary research. 
I suggested the increasing reliance on extraordinary levies like the mnona as a possible 
factor but doubted its adequacy. There may be some obvious e.xp]anation; but I can¬ 
not recall that anyone has offered one, 

(3} I did not deny the duality of citizenship supposed by Segre. On the contrary, 
this w'as the one point in his article which I found very plausible. 1 said explicitly on 
p. 49 'There is a good deal to be said for Segre’s view' that the Aurelii were citizens 
suigeneris'; but I was not prepared to be more positive than that. 

(4) As regards the power to make wills, there may be some legal subtlety here which, 
being no jurist, I have misunderstood. But Ulpian does seem to imply that deditiai, 
in the sense of the word given to it by Segre for the ‘ Egj'ptians’, could not make 
(legal) w'ills; yet w'e know that the ‘Egyptians’ did make wills, no doubt by Graeco- 
Egypttan law' as Segre says, but they w'ere recognized by the Roman administration 
and could be cited in law-suits before courts presided over by the prefect or his delegate. 



A Mother-of.pearl Shell Disk of Sen-wosm IH 

Lv M f. u G^*. pp. j 88 ft, th.« I. , pnp^ by h, ^ WiJock on P^l Sh.ll, 

o/,?o.-n»j r«/dt^; sS molhor,of-p«.rl shell disks, of wbieh ij aee inaeribed with the 

prenomen (©f^ and 12 with the nomen C1FT„1 - rrom this he concluded that, since 
the prenomen of no other king Sen-wosret has turned up. it is safe to assume that all 27 aheIJs 
of that ^ same king Kheper-ka-Re Sen-wosret I, He mentioned one other disk 

It « th f * ®“^«essor Amen-em-hat JI and said that there, as for as he knew, the series ended. 
fiUd' » place on record that, among the Sudan Government’s sKare of the 

hnds maffc by the Harvard-Boston expedition in igaS at Uronani (Gezirat el-Melik) in Wadi Haifa 

4 ^u *l«k peifomted with two holes, on which is incised, more 

roughly than those depicted in Dr. Winlock’s pi. 62, a cartouche supported on each side by a uraeus 

and containing the prenomcn of Sen-wosret III (©auUU^ . This is registcrEd in the Khartoum 
antiquities collection catalogue as No. 3044, j 

A Suggestion regarding the Construction of the Pyramids 
WUEN visiting the Soci^te Nationale du Papier at Aboukir near Alexandria recently. I saw several 
pj ramids. 40 to 50 feet high, constructed of bales of rice straw. Rice straw is one of the principal 
matenals of this important factory and large amounts have to be stored ready for use in the 
acture o vanous grades of stmw board. .As we passed these pyramids I noticed that there 
n about 4 or 5 f«t wide and 6 or 7 high, on one side of each pyramid. I asked the 

manager, * on ar m, 1 this was the entrance to 3 shelter in which the trorkmen rested, 
but was told ^at it w« through these entrances that the bales were carried during the construction 
o epyr^i w ere hutit from the inside. I therefore made a closer examination and found 

that what looked like a smaU chamber was a sloping passage or tunnel leading right into the interior 
of the pyramid. Apparently m constructing the base of the pjiamid. an opening is left in one side 
a sloping p^ge is made from this opening nearly to the other side of the pyramid. .Ail the 
bales are earned up this internal ramp (which had a slope of about 20') and the building of the 
py^d IS continued from the inside. When the structure has risen about 6 or 7 feet above the floor 
of the pa^^, afew len^ of t,mbcr or non are placed across the passage, which is then roofed in 
ith the bai« which will fom pan of the next layer. The result is a sloping tunnel through the 
oNver part of the pyr^id. 1 he passage is then niade to turn on itsolf at an acute angle till the next 
layer of the pymmid has been buUt and is again roofed in. I’liis goes on till the top of the pyramid 
IS reached, _a]l the constmction having been carried out by taking the bales up this sloping,'zigzag 

^ r staircase without any steps. Mr. Parkin infomied me that this was 

the loc^ Egyptian labomcis own method of construction; they had been told merely to stack the 
lea. Have they unwittingly adopted some hereditary, traditional method of construction, handed 
^own through the centuries from the buUding of the Pyramids, and does this throw any light on 
one, at l^t, of the methods by which those enormous monuments were built? It will be wen that 
the method ^ much more economical in labour and materials than one bawd on external ramps 

which must have reached enormous dimensions. I shaU be interested to leam if this suggestion is 
new to Egyptian archaeologisu. eec^oon is 

J. E, G. Harris 


The Elephant's Trunk called Its drt (^rf) ‘ Hand ' 

The Lieutenant-Commander of the Sotdiera Amenemhab relates in his biography (LVit. iv, 893-4) 
that white Tuthmosis III was himting a herd of 120 elephants in Niy,' he engaged 'the largest 
among them and cut off its dri {drt) "hand” while alive’; for this brave deed he was rewarded 
by his sovereign with a gift of gold and raiment. This is the earliest name for the elephant’s 
trunk and is exceedingly apt. Aristotle {H.A. 497 b, 25 ff,), describing the animal, wrote: 'It 
has a proboscis such in properties and such in size as to allow of its using the same for a 
hand. For it eats and drinks by lifting up its food with the aid of this organ into its mouth, 
and with the same organ it lifts up articles to the driver on its bacit; and with this organ it 
can pluck up trees by the roots.’ Latin writers called the trunk ‘the hand' (manar); Cicero {De 
rtatura dtorum., Il, xlvii, 123) w^rote ‘the elephant is even provided with a hand {mamu etiam data 
elephant is) because his body is'iso targe that it is difficult for him to reach his food’, Silius Italicus 
{Punica, ix, 625 ff.) relates how Mincius at the battle of Cannae drew his sword to attack an 
elephant, 'but this brave deed miscarried; for the trunk {menus) of the trumpeting monster . , . 
wound its angry' coils round him and lifted him up; then it brandished his bodv in that dreadful 
grasp and hurled it high in the air, and dashed the crushed limbs of the poor wTetch upon the 
ground’. The andent Egyptian officer must have been skilled in hunting the elephant and probably 
knew that by cutting off the trunk the animal is at once rendered harmless and soon dies. The 
most expert elephant-hunters of modem times—the Hamran Arabs who inhabited the country to 
the south of Kassala between that fowu and the Base country—killed the animal with no other 
weapon than the sword. Sir Samuel Baker {Nile Tributaries, 4th ed. 1871, 117) records that should 
they discover the elephant asleep, 'one of the hunters would creep stealthily towards the head and 
with one blow sever the trunk while stretched upon the ground; in which case the elephant w'ould 
start upon his feet, while the hunters escaped in the confusion of the moment. The trunk severed 
would cause an haemorrhage sufficient to ensure the death of the elephant w'ithin about an hour.’ 
The term ‘hand’ is even more apt for the trunk of the African species than for that of the Indian 
which was hunted by Tuthmosis III. The African species has two tactile and grasping projections 
called ‘fingers', placed above and below the two nostrils at the end of the trunk; a prehistoric draw¬ 
ing of an elephant on ajar which I published in P,S.B,A. XX[ (igoa), p. 251, PL i, No. 5, seems to 
show these two ‘fingers’. Ray Lankester {Science from an Easy Chair, 2nd series, 1920, 132) said 
that he had seen an elephant pick up with equal facility a heavy man and then a threepenny piece. 

P, E. NEWBEHliy 

The ‘Formido’ employed in Hunting by the Egyptians of the Middle Kingdom 

In the tomb of Dhuthotpe at Der el-Bershah {El B. 1, pi. viL) there is a finely sculptured scene show¬ 
ing the owner of the tomb hunting w'ild animals in the desert. In describing this scene fifty years 
ago 1 wrote fpp. 13-14): 'We see two parallel lines of netting (placed upright on the wall), one end 
being dosed by poles, and a cord or scare put in place by the huntsmen; the other end at the top 
of the wall is destroyed. The enclosed space is filled with sculptured demils representing the 
surface of the desert covered w'ith bushes, wild animals and huntsmen. The Egyptian draughts¬ 
man has arranged them all in distinct rows, one above the other; seven of these remain, while one 
or two at the top have been destroyed.,, , It is much to be deplored that the colours have entirely 
gone from this interesting sculpture.' The cord stretched on poles across the bottom end of the 
nets greatly puzzled me, for although I called it 'a scare*, it is difficult to sec how a single bare cord 
could have served SUCh a purpose. Years later w'hen reading OppLan's Cya^elica the explanation 

* Anetfier record of this elephant hunt is given on the Amumt Stela of Tuthmosis HI in Sir Robert Mond 
and O. H. Myers, Temfdes ef AtTtianl, i(>4o. pJ. dii, line 7, with tramlation by Miss DrowEr. p, 183, .4n eariJer 
hunt in the same wai undeituken by Tuthmosis f (Urk. iV| 104)^ 


became apparent. After describing the nets that were employed in hunting in his ftrne, Oppian 
says (iv. 3S0 IT.) that on either hand in the two wings the huntsmen stretch 'a well-tw'ined long 
rope of flax a little above the ground in such wise that the cord would reach a man's wajstj There¬ 
from are hung many coloured ribbons, ^'arious and bright, a scare to wild beasts, and suspended 
therefrom countless bright feathers of >'ulturcs, white swans and storks . , . with the roaring wind 
the nbbona wave aloft in the air and the swinging feathers whistle shrill’. Dhuthotpe's hunting 
scene la sculptured on the right-hand wall of the vestibule of his tomb and the ceiling abo\'e it has 
collapsed and left it exposed to the weather with the result that every vestige of colouring has 
diMp^red. A study of the sculptured and painted tombs in Egypt has shown that the Bculpton 
0^ left small de^ls to be added by the painter's brush,* and I do not doubt that when the tomb 
of Dhuthotpe was in its perfect state the sculptured cord was painted with coloured stripes indicat¬ 
ing fratheia and ribbons as described by Oppian. This apparatus was called by Latin writers a 
formido’, and it is menrioned by Virgil (Atmeid, Xll, 750; cf. iv, 120) and others. The only illustra¬ 
tion of It m Egypt IS this 7 >Sr el-Bershah scene which dates from about 1S50 B.C. Whether there 
are any representations of it in the mosaic hunting scenes that have been found in North .Africa or 
Italy I do not know, and should be grateful for any information on the subject, 

P. E. Newberry 

Ineditum Gampioneuin Nottinghametise* 

The late Mr. E. W, Campion of Nottingham acquired a Greek inscription of Egyptian origin from 
a sailor forty-five years or so ago which has formed part of the Campion Collection in Nottingham 
ever smee. It answers the following description; Yellow sandstone. Length 34-2 cm,, height 
40-5 cm., thickness 67 cm. The back of the stone was left unpolished. It was obviously set into 
the wall of the brass foundry mentioned in the inscription. Above /. i, a stylired labanim. Letters 
of V/\TI cent. a.d. The text is here printed in two columns to save space. 

Sfo^ Q ^[oj- tpyaanjpioi/ 

tjAu(l') AtHTH 

lumj^up iir( ( ) OK- nAijouu' w Svoftan 

ni ,0 7 ( 7 ^% (w) 'Ey /«,- 

5 orwTc ToSroy (w) ^ ^ g 

Toy ^foWnifdi- (ric) &Jrr<HiiKis) t. 

/. I. The ^ on the r. is only partly preserved, but certain. 

/. 2. On the I., rivo dots, 

/. 3/4. Either the symbol for a coin or, not so likely, the name of a fixed period of time appears to 
be omitted before or after din-ev, e,g. abbrev. ®) or (pijvaY). 

/. 6/7. The expressionyoAiwuTUfdf tpyaoT^ptov^ ‘brass foundry’, does not occur in Greek literary 
or unliterary written texts known to me, and seems to be a BTiuf It is the Greek equivalent 

^ Latin/afrnra atrana. ojffitina aeraria, ojffiano aemriorum. Cp, Thti. Ling. La/, s.w .; H. filuemner, 
Tethtudf^a and Tmnittolqgie der Getoerbe und Kunste bei GriffAen utid Romen, IV (1887), 324. 
This or a similar Greek expression may have been at the back of Quintilian's mind in ffiit., «, 21. 10. 

/. 10. The name of Jesus Christ is given in a common abbreviation without regard for the 
genitive case. ** 

■ The mrd in ^ Egyprin scene is placed much higher up than ‘a man’s waist', and probahlv more 
enecuvi: tlian if pUced lower dowri. 

* N. de G. Davies, J, p. 47^ has also pamted this out. 

It U my af^eable duty to thank Mr. G. F. Campion nf Nottingham for his kind peimiaaion to publish the 

College. Nottingham, Dr. R. ftcgvnsburger. The Library, 
School. Church Beeaton, for advice on $[S 




II- Professor U. Wiickeri is inclmed to attribute Byzajitine in which the emperor is 
omitted to the time of the Persian ocenpation of Egypt. If he is rightt^ the date of our inscription 
would be 1 October 621 a.d. The lettering of the Jast two lines of the inseriptlon has been rather 
crowded by the inefficient mason- The abbreviation is mdicated by two small vertical and parallel 
lines only. 

The new inscription*^ an the adulterated Greek of a country where the native Coptic language 
had regained its strengthp throw's some light on the economic position of the Church communities 
in Byzantine Eg>pt. Workshops of many kinds had been acquired or built as Church po$sessions. 
Thc Church had achieved a key position in the econotnlc life of the countryp the first beginnings of 
a well-known medieval development w hichi in the Wesip is closely connected with the history of the 
Benedictine monasteries. F. M. Heichelkeim 

The Dsite of the Accession to the Throne of Dioclettan 
P, OxY^ 2187 (a,d* 304) resolves the controversial question of the date of the accession of Diocletian 
to the throne. The date of the vicennaHa celebrated in Rome by Diodetiani is November 17, 303, 
according to Euseb- Mart. pal. I, j, cp. IJ, 4 J«jt? /iTpiJv fiWcHraijS«wTTj aJnj Tmipd o np 6 

ScimiTtfm d€tc€^pptov. On this evidence Seeck^ supposed the date of the beginning of the 

reign of Diocletian to be November 17* 284^ against ChnoOp Pasch.* which indicates the date 
September 17^ ^84.^ Seect asserts that this date is not correct on the basis of the coinage of the third 
year of Carinus and Numerianus In Egy^pt. ITie year of the reign in Egypt began August 29. Seecb 
argues that the coins of the third year of these emperors are not so rare as would be expected if the 
two emperors had reigned only zo days of the third year* Thb aipimcnt is not convincing. 
Obviously the mint of Alexandria went on striking the coins of Carinus and NumeKanus until the 
new dies with the image of Diocletian reached Alexandria. Moreover C* lust, 111* 7 has the date 
October 15, 284. Seeck says that this date transmitted by Haloander has very little authority. Now 
P- Oxy. 2187* 21 ff. show% beyond any doubt that before Uathyr 1 1 ^ November 7;^ 303* the amnesty 
for the vicennalia had been granted in Egypt. We conclude that Diocletian became emperor 
September 17. 284* that the amnesty for the vicennalia was granted September 17,303, and that the 
vicennalia were celebrated later in Rome* November 17, 303. 

A, SrcRfe 

* Arfh.f. Pffp, XIII (e 9 J^)- 153 f- 

^ Cf- A- Sicinwenicr, Die RechUfUUtiFig drr Kirckar and Kloitfr nach den Fc^yri^ in SiTtigny ZrlUr/ir. 

AhL XIX I f. J G. ChedJnjp i rmilfali della papiroiaf^ perfaiioria della tfdesa mAiUnth, Meitr. m Pap., 

xix (i 934 )p 373 f.; W* Hengstenberg* Bemerkungen zvr Efjitekkhi^jgesekkhte det Aegypiuchen Mdtiehlmm, 
m Immilya na Bul^nktya Arkheedi^ehetki ix (1935)^ 355 f. 

^ The date November 18 ^iven by Lactandus, £>. m.p. i7p ip is certauily due to m slighteirar In ihe Latin MS., 
see Seeck, Gesehr d. Unlerganges d. anir i** 438, 

* The dace September 17 had been correctly accepted by E. Costa* Diz. Epigr. 11* The Cfiiidsm of 

Seeckp followed by E. Siein, GercA. d. tpatr^. Rejehes, 94 n. ip goes all astray. 



Papyri from Tebly^, II {Micht^&n Papyri, V. cd, E, M. Husselman, A. E. R. Bqak, VV. F. 

Univtrsit)- of MjcKi^ Prcss^ Ann Arbor^ 1^44^ Pp. 3ipc:-j-446p 6 pU.j t test figure. S S-OO. 

This mstructive tdition of 131 dDcuments with its abk, but slightly too concentiated^ Cdntioeatajry sheds 
new light 00 problems which have been discussed since the first texts of Part 1 became accessible in 19^3^ 
The ^aphfum of Tebtynb and its ofiGcials are better known to us to-day than any oomparable Egyptian 
institution of the first century A.t 3 + We now know fairly well how Greek and Demotic contracts w'ere drawn 
up wTih subscriptions and copies, and depoaited there. Further we now know at least something of an 
unusiialJy large percentage of the inhabitant? of Tebt^mis during this dmc» occasionally ev en with their 
handwTiting and famUy tables. The social aspect of this archive is interesting enough. An upper class of 
medium landowners and medium tenants had sprung up, the main taxpayers and main participants in the 
transactions and social clubs of our archive. Individual violent quarrelB about economic queations between 
this bourgemstt and the poorer populatioii show% I think, characteristics of a minor clas war. No. 312 
mentionSp for the first time, the much discussed Tii Claudius Balbillus as the owner of a large estate, and is 
therefore of geneml historic importance. Two new^ taxes, and ir/w ^voik^v, and the rare 

^piXav T&1TOU, occur^ The club of dimAJin/iet of No+ 244 can best be compared with the late 

Ptolemaic <n?t^oSoe yewpyoiv lS£cui^ if my interpretation of the Incditum Adlerianum (il/fwi* Andr^adi^ 
(1939)1 1 ^ preferred to that of Ah Roato^iififF and Efoa. Iliit. of thi World, iii^ 1499 )- third 

volume of these invaluable documents ia intended to contain the merely frflgrnentajy texts and those of 
pakffographic difficulty. May I conclude with the wish that this %^o]ume may include the foOowing badly 
needed desiderata-, a legal commentary on the archive which may lead to surprising discoveries, an up-to- 
date topographical survey of the Tebtynis region* and Addenda and Corrigenda in which all the literature 
and suggestions for the Michigan Tebt>Tiis texts are collected together with considered notes by the 
editors as to their value. F- HercitELHEiM 

Other Recent Books. Of the many war-time produdrions that have now reached ua it is possible to mention 
only a few of cxceptionaj value, 

Ffjf/™/ Srenes 0/ Ramsfs III {Medinet Hahu, vol, IV), By The Eficbaphic Survev* Chicago, 1940. 
Continuation of the brilliant publication by the Oriental Institute. Large fol., jdr pp.+ S7 pls^^ 3 of them in 
colour, mainly deafing with the festivals of Min and of Sokar, including illustEathx material from other 
temples. A t^'oik of fimdEmental imporiance. 

The Tomb 0/ Rekft-mi-Re^ at Thehet. By NoRXia^v he Garis Davies. New York, Metropolitan Museum 
of Art, 1943. Fob, vol, i, x+iao pp.^ 9 ills.. § pis.; vol. H, x pp., 117 pis. Unhappily to end the Museum's 
series of Theban Tombs. A very fine w^ojk, the author^s ksi. Complete publkatioii of the celebrated tomb 
of TuthmosU HTs V'izier. The coloured plates appeared sepaiatcly in 1935. 

Egypt in the Clasneal Gec^aphers. By J. Bmju Cairo, 1942. 4.I0. vi+aoj pp-* 8 pla. and portrait of 
author, 18 in the text. Posthumous work, seen through the press by G, W, Murray^ who contributes 
a preface. Exceedingly useful analyst of the main ancient authors by an eminent practical geographer. 
Ptolemy's methods are particularly lucidly explained, his enurs statisti^Iy treated. Identifications of sites 
seem generally very sound and distances indicated by the andents are compared with modem survey results. 

Late Egyptian and Copik Art. Brooklyn Museum, 1943. 410, 24 pp., 54 photographic plates. Intro¬ 
duction and most of the explanatory notes on the objects illustrated (paintings, reliefs* bronzy, pottery* 
tcxdles, kcJ} by JotiW D. CoonfT. An important cemapectua of the chief objects in the oollection. 



JEA nvin, 33, n, 9: After 77, 7 inEert; 89, 7. 

JEA ms, p, j, n. d: For further uistauccs of Hddt = las sec £. i, 265, 12; 273, 19; 315, 15; 359, 2; 
vit S6p 3; vtt, ijOp 5; = Hathor see 105, 9; perhaps E. ip 313, 1 ; = personificatjon of Wetjset-ljor 
see E, vi, ajSp 3“4+ R 4^ n. c; Tninsl. *of erect bearing', *(if upright cairwge^ finds support, in diun^i 
hiti hr jfy, £, v, 142, 1 For ^ replaced by w ritten * in h htti ijr ty, *I stand erect wietding the 
weapon'^ see E. 41, 13. F. 5, n+ f: Fqr weapon in right hand and rdpc in left setr also E. v, 183, 

Id-12. P. 5 p n, g: Possibly in original version of passage refcired to reading not* as wc have 

suggested, mi Ir shfy but ml thiy ka, — lit. "like what a bold fen-man doe8^ P. 7, U. 20-21 = 
E. vip 65p 8-9: If emendation tn ChaasinaFs n. i is eorroct (cf. E. i, 560, 13} w^e should transl. "The second 
lance which attadicd the Caitiff as he drew' ncar\ For this meaning of m wiy-f see Wh. j, 246, lo, and 
above dted passage, E. 1, 560, 13* P. Qp L 2 = E. vi, 68, 2: TransJ, not "wall of stone' hut 'outwork 
(or 'shelter') of tare stone"; see Driotoo, BuiL ImL/t., ov, 11, n, f, who rightly reads the m this and other 
passages quoted hy hJmp hut is wrong in rendering 'roof. As E. ifp lai* 9 (cf. E. 11^ 107, z) clearly 
shows it is a mJswTidng of * P. 9, L 8 = E. VJ, 68, 4-5: For fft "palace^ as fern, noun see also E^ vi, 
112, 5; 113, 31 Wb. u 214. P. 9^ n. h; E. 302, 10, suggests that this demon's name is after all Kf- 
(or perhaps = Bulb (or Ixird-) of-Trotb. P. 10^ n- j: After FP^. 475, read 4 not 41. 

P. II, n. f: More exx, of trwt "teeth* occur E. iVp 269, 15; 2S6, 3- vii, 152^ 16. P. 14, IL 26-27 = 
E. VTp 7f, 8: Perhaps transl. "I repel from thy seat them who come with evil intcnt\ P. 15^ I. 13 = 

vTk 73, 2: For "bis temple' read "the House^bthe-Falcon {//reZ-^i^)/ P. 16, 11 . 22 and 24 £. vi, 

74, 10: For _^n ^ transl. by na 'ready for the fray', see Wb. nr, 147, 6, and for ^ ^ p w^hich w'c tentatively 
render 'inspiring fear", see Wh Tit, 147, 13. P. 17* 1 . 30 = 1 '. vi, 7S, 3 : Perhaps 'crunch' here mther 
than ‘cut in pieces". F. 17, n. e; For more exx. of title hm-gmhste see £. 359, 4; 544, 9; 571, 9; 

Tv^ 77 t 5i ^02, 6; 153, 2; vii, S7, 14^ D. rv„ 18, 6_ For pricat in question as Shu see also E. 152, 2; 
i§%, 7-8; vir, 25, 13-14- For dtJe Am-ffr n fff-n/r sec furthermofe K (, 571, 9; 748, 10. For yet other 

cAx. of hm-tfr see £. t, 359, 4^ v, 49, i2j vir, 30, 13; 31, 1; 33, 13; 59, 2; Si, r; S7, 13. 

JEA ra, p. 9, IL 7-8 = E. vij S4, 5: For use of spells to protect ships see also E* vr, 128, 4 (where 
redter is again Thoth), and E. fil, 347, iz; 125^ 2. 7. P. 10, I. 9 = £", vi^ 83, lo^ii: For insy 

see Drioton, Buli^ ImL fr. XXV* 6 wi^ n. h; also E^ rv, 344, 2. 

Commentary, n. 2 1 Other exx, of Dm with hippotamus-determ^ occur E. 1, io, 1-3; 456, i3(?); v, 154, 
t8; YE, 62, 3« For two more exx# with hide-dcteirn. ace £. i, 309^ ez; D, iv, 24, 12. In E. i,. 346, zz. Dm 
ia written ] N. 4: For another ex* of ^ 4 ^ see £, vii^ 19,4. N, 6, (a)- For another 

ex. of With ^-determ. sec E, v, 257, 2. K. 6, (c): j , E. iv* 273, 16, in view of preceding 

possibly to be read rather than N. 6, (f): For \'aiiant E, j* 464, 14, 

sec HI, 96, 1-2; also E. i, 470, 1 ; 11, 234,6-7. K. 6: Add (g) bkaw; ex. i (demons 

who guard Osiris), F. i, 166^ 17. To sbe occurrences of ^ (var. as an ideogram already dted eight more 
must be added, namely E. 1+ 464,12^ where following n Awil-J suggests reading fm^tytex E^ vii, 284, 2, where, 
in view of nt hmei Fr^, hnfiyts should pierhapa again be read ; E. i, 309^ 2^ where paralleliam with tepaiyv? 
suggests reading kby^w. In the five following exs,, E. v, 104,6; 206, Sj 302, 11 ; 355,6 ; vir, 301 , 15, presence 
of i in adjacent words suggests reading N. 7: The temple library at Edfu is designated" Library^ 

of Horus*9 pr- 7 nd^{w)tn ffr, in E. ill, 339, 9, and "Library^ of pr-r^/(ie)t n in E, in, 339^ 12. In 
latter instance it is said to contain the ‘Emanations of R€*", in former, the 'Emanations of Atum*. So far wc 
have met with one other ex. of this variant of notmal fijtv /T, E. tli, 351, 11-12^ With regard to the king 
it should be noted that as ‘son of the lord of FEcrmopolis" he acc. to E. v, 41,4-5^ 'master of the Emana¬ 
tions of '. He holds latter title also as ‘excellent son of Isdcs'^ and, 21 same time:, inappropriately 



bears appellation ‘compilef (f) of the service-book (tfmhbyi} tike the lord of the JW»r-pIant', E. iv, 57, 2. 
N. 9: A good ME. of ,3^ [= nmt, used tn parallelistn with rtt/ytei, occurs E. vtl, 269. 8, 3^' dearly tr^ds 
^pl iq ^4}^^ til% o **{**) Jn bitiffi 'there is no dearth during thy reign’ E V'li 70 17 

N. 10: For & perhapa-'erect phaJlus' see also E. y, 185,1. N. 15, 4: For another ex. oWU=‘crunch- 
see£. VII, 324,10. N. 19; Ex. of hnjip.jnw without detenn. also found E. 1. 424, 15, In 

^ ® ^ “* N. ao: Tn final paragraph for ‘like Nfm in ex*, c 10*^ 

read hfcc fftm m cm. 5-11’ Other exx. of Ar-ms are E. i. 570, 5; iv. 119, 8; 120.'iz; 309. 16; v, 44. 4; 

VK •** J8: 157. 12; ibo. 13; 285, 16; 322,8; 326. 8; vt, 237, 9: 277, bj 2S7, i; 310, 13; 

V ' "f* ‘i 3 * 9 . SI vm, 62, 16; Af,. 77. i; 89, 18. N. 24- 

Fen-goddess s« also E. i. 464. V, 4 ^. 3-61SS 5 . 8; 565. 91 5&7.8. X. 25; Acc, to irA, iv. 47». ». 

■* "TT. impUed m our note. But see spellings 0/ T/yt, E, it, 163. 15* 164, 7. 

In any case ^ is clearly identified with Tfyl in those passages quoted by tia irt which her name appears 
N. j6, end: Mt^r 'wk^ut limit’ add ‘i P^babiy also the *S-//r which supplied the god with m-geese. 

Ip I Up 4.10. N, 38: For Medjhotpe as occupant of the Htiji-mrJit at Edfu see also E i i8S 
N. 41: Dr Gardiner points out to us that E. vi. 5,, No. XVIII, definiteiv connects Chemmi’s with the 
seventeenth Lower-Egyptian nome; so too probably E. vi, 48, No. XCIX. K 41 i- Other exx 
with ^ peeped ^ t- V. 209,9; ^ I; ©, E. v, 263,8. N. 41,2: To exs. dted’add f ^f e. 
E. V. 32b, 6 ; 51, 10; , E, vii, 124. z; oj E. vu, 177, 14; 4 , 

'■ ^55. « 5 -i 6 ; T q t I'j ® - £■ V, 236, 8, N. 4 j, 3; For» f ; see also £. v. 37, 13; ^^ib; 
392 . I; VII, 176. tj■ add sj f e. E. v, 338,9. N. 4 *. 4: Add f \vi, 48.3 ; f \|. E. vii, 83, 7. 

N.41, 7: Another %-ery similar writing occurs £. v, 100, 13. N, 41, 10: E. v, zee 12 is 

undoubtedly a writing of Chemmts. » t 

Further Aj^itions. xxix, p. 5, I. tb = E. vi, 6 t, 8. For the blade of four cubits see also J?. iii, 

’t, . J r* **■ ^ *" *3 ;=*>*. '3 ; 296. I 5 ‘ P* 12. II. 9-10 = 

’ • 9 * • • vtir, 2^ lb-17, P. lb, n. i: Add E, it, 163, n; in, 193, 3J iv, 120, 7, 

JE/I xfx,p. 12 D a; Gardiner thinks emendation probable though he knows of no cult of Khnum 
nearer to Atfl|i than Kafr 'Ammir. 

CoMMENTASY, n, 2 : For yet another ex. of Dra with hippopotamus-detenn. see E. viii 7 4 Further 
exx. with hidc-dcte™. are £. viii, 8, 7: io, n; 27, i-z; 77, 13. N, 6: Add (h) hw/y-w ‘disease- 
emoDs . ex, iii, 317, 4. N. 6; To the eight more occurrences ofas an ideo¬ 

gram add E. 1,301,9, where again parallelism with vjpwtya suggests the reading hbyio and E viu ion 1 
wheie the reading is doubtful. N. 9 ■ For another instance of probably reading nmf se^ Eui[ 

4 - N. 17. i- For this Ideogram as title of king (reading TFir/y?) sec £. vin, 34, jj; 37, i. 

N, 19: Another ex. of fmytu-mte with crocodUe and hippopotamus determs. foUowcd by I is E, yiu.n^is. 

or E. vj, 229, 3, read B, Vi, 239, 5. io~ii. fj. 41, i; Yet another ex. with ^ prepcsed occurs 

t. HI. 193. 3. An c!L of the earlier spelling with not preposed is f E, », iiS, 2. N. 41, 

5 (a); To t*. cited add £, m, 193, 4, n, ^ ^ 

Recent Publications of 

I The Eg)'pt Exploration Society 

A amfiJeie Hit it Aaii at to lAe Sttretary at 2 Hinxte Street, Maneheiter S^tatef London, H'.x 


XXXVIll. THE cmr of AKHENATEN. Pan I. Bjr T, E. Pbet, C. L. Woolley, 6. Grow, 

P, L. O. Gwe, Mill F, G. Newtos. Shcty-Jcmr Plate* {four coltmKcl). *933, ^ 3 #, 

XXXIX. THE CEKOTAPH OF SETI I AT ABYDOS. Bj H. Frmwfokt, with chapt«a bj 
A. tje Bcck and BATTlfictiMHE GtiHH. VoI. I, Text; Vol. fl, Plate*(aifterr^thfce). 1933. 
53f. 6d. 

XL. THE CITY OF AKHENATEN, F«t 11 , By H. FluJfKlwr and J. D. S. PtoDLEBOJOr, 
with a clmpter by H. W. FAtaMAK. FiTty-cight plate* (one coloured). 1933^ 42a. 

XLl. THE BUCHEOM. By Sir Runerr Mono and O. H. Mvebs, with the Hieiti^lyphic 
Inscriptioiu edited by H. FAUUtAN. Vo], 1 , The Site; VoI. II, The Inacriptiaiu; 
VoI. Til, t^Btea (two hundied). 1934^ 501. 

XLlf. CEMETEtUES OF ARALANT. Part h By Sir Robebt Mokd and 0 , H, Mtjss. \ol, I, 
Text; VoL II, Plate* (eevcnty-eiphi, one colouied]. 1938. aj#. 

XtlU. TEMPLES OF ARiMAST- By Sir Robext Mond and O. H. Myzbs. VqL I, Teatt; VoI, U, 
Plates (one bundled and eeven, three coloured). 1940. 631, 


XXVt. ROCK-DRAWINGS OF SOU'niERN UPPER EGTtTl', Part L By Hans A. Wjwiujpi, 
with Preface by Sir Robert Mokd., Faity«otic Plates. 1938. z8r. 

Stxty>two Plates (one coloured), 1939. 35*. 


XXI, GREEK OSTRACA IN TftE BODLEIAN LIBRARY, tox. By J. G. Tait. 1930. 421, 

XXIL TIA'O THEOCRITUS P,APYRI- By A, S. Hunt and J, Jounson, Two Collotype Pkn*. 
1930. 43^1 

XXUL THE TEBTUNTS PAPYRI, VoI, III, Part 1 . By A, S. Hunt and J. G. Smtly. Seaen 
Collotype Piaiea. 1933. (AvaHabk far mra^etf Ifte Socuiy mfy, 

XXIV, GREEK SHORTHAND MANUALS. By H. J. M. MllNx. Note CoUotype Plate*. 

1934, 43f. 

XXV. THE TEBTUNIS PAPYRI, VoI. Ill, Part IL By C. C. Edoab, Four Collatype Rata. 

1935, (Availabk far amhen ff tht Ssoirfy tafy, iStJ 

XXVL THE OXYRHYNCHDS F.AP\'RL Part XVllI. By E. Loubl. C. H. Roflarmt, and E. P. 
Wecekeb, Portrait and founecn Collotype PLuea. 1941. 631. 


JOURNAL OF EGYPT**'* Vola, i^ir, 35*. each; die rest, ytu. each. 

THE THEBA.N 1*0^ 'nd A. H. Gakdikeh, with 



rt,- . 





■ijM wj> jir BEKNAlU> QUARTTCH, 11 aaAm^ Niw JHMO IT^ W. 11 HUMMiREV MILFORi>. 

OtfOBB LIlimillT PlIBK, UDVC, Vuwm lO. £.C14. um 11* rirm Amm:*, nn iiw, 

CAMBRtOOE UMIVERsrnr FHESS. HNtur Moan, Bn Rvnw «w, ixMtMKi, N.vr,i] ^ 



1 ’ 


A ''' 

en •if'" -sfe/'f ' r\^455>^: ■“ I 

• ' 

^ ■ .-tJv-. ’;•. - ;»i ' , *»i tL*-'!-/ ■^ * 

f^K^:.: .: ■'W 

;#: '■ i'' A.' ■ 't alt- K -. .\Mk%rt !5i^ 

'V;'',OiX ."' : 3 y 

It ► ^ 


&fv. ,j^f -'4 ■^' 

K ■■ 

^A» . " • j.j| . 

' -.'■'‘^'^10#: 4;, ,.../ i 

• r 


►, '' 


it ‘ '•'rf 

•li: :•'- 


p: -yvj 

■m m ' • • 


^1 'A ^,;:.; i’^ '^;; 




'*A book ifmi is shut is but a block" jf, ■ t 

^^^neoloc, I 

V ^ ^ ^ 

^ GOVT- OF ttJDIA ^ I 

^ Dtpatment ol Archaeolofy | 






> t'